VAWA Posts:
REHNQUIST URGES GO-SLOW POSTURE ON COURT REFORM
Buffalo News, The (NY)
January 1, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
Congress is endangering the quality and credibility of federal courts by trying to make federal cases of too many crimes and non-criminal disputes, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist says.
"Unless checked, the result will be a degradation in the high quality of justice the nation has long expected of the federal courts," he said in his 1991 year-end report on the federal judiciary.
Rehnquist said Congress should not expand federal court jurisdiction to "intrude into areas of the law that have traditionally been reserved to state courts."
He noted that the U.S. Judicial Conference, the federal courts' policy-making board he heads, opposed provisions of the Violent Crime Control Act of 1991 that would have allowed federal prosecutions for virtually any case in which a gun is used to commit a murder.
The provisions did not become law "but could resurface when that legislation is reconsidered in 1992," Rehnquist said. "I urge Congress to consider the serious implications to the federal courts."
He had similar concerns about the Violence Against Women Act. He said the proposed law, which would let women sue those who victimize them, "could involve federal courts in a whole host of domestic relations disputes."
The chief justice recommended "modest curtailment" rather than expansion of federal jurisdiction.
"Unless actions are taken to reverse current trends, or slow them down considerably, the federal courts of the future will be dramatically changed. Few will welcome those changes," he said. "Judges will have less time to spend on individual cases, . . . less of a sense of personal responsibility and accountability for the work they produce," he said.
Rehnquist said adding more judges is not the solution. "Although the provision of some additional judicial resources is necessary in the short run, the long-term implications of expanding the federal judiciary should give everyone pause," he said.
The federal courts have 649 trial judges and 179 appellate judges. Its 1992 budget is $2.3 billion.
"The federal court system presently is like a city in the arid West which is using every bit of its water resources to supply current needs," Rehnquist added. "We must conserve water, not think of building new subdivisions. We must also think of how to cut down on present uses of water because we know that some new subdivisions will inevitably be built."
Workloads for federal trial judges actually declined in 1991, Rehnquist reported. Criminal case filings fell 4 percent, the first drop in over a decade, despite a 21 percent rise in fraud prosecutions in the savings and loan crisis.
Civil, or non-criminal, case filings in federal trial courts also declined in 1991, by 5 percent to 208,000. New bankruptcy cases continued to increase, up more than 21 percent -- to nearly 900,000.
WIDENING U.S. COURTS` ROLE COULD DILUTE JUSTICE, REHNQUIST WARNS
Charlotte Observer, The (NC)
January 1, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
Congress is endangering the quality and credibility of federal courts by trying to make federal cases of too many crimes and disputes, Chief Justice William Rehnquist says.
``Unless checked, the result will be a degradation in the high quality of justice the nation has long expected of the federal courts,`` Rehnquist said in his 1991 year-end report on the federal judiciary.
Rehnquist, the nation`s highest-ranking judge, said Congress should not expand federal court jurisdiction to ``intrude into areas of the law that have traditionally been reserved to state courts``
He noted that the U.S. Judicial Conference, the federal courts` policy- making board that he heads, opposed provisions of the Violent Crime Control Act of 1991 that would have allowed federal prosecutions for virtually any case in which a gun is used to murder.
The provisions did not become law ``but could resurface when that legislation is reconsidered in 1992,`` Rehnquist said. ``I urge Congress to consider the serious implications to the federal courts.``
Similarly, the chief justice voiced concerns about the Violence Against Women Act. He said the proposed law, which would let women sue those who victimize them, ``could involve federal courts in a whole host of domestic relations disputes.``
The chief justice recommended ``modest curtailment`` rather than expansion of court jurisdiction.
``Unless actions are taken . . . the federal courts of the future will be dramatically changed. Few will welcome those changes,`` he said.
``Judges will have less time to spend on individual cases . . . less of a sense of personal responsibility and accountability for the work they produce,`` he said.
Rehnquist said adding more judges is not the solution.
Work loads for federal trial judges actually declined in 1991.
Criminal case filings fell 4 percent, despite a 21 percent rise in fraud prosecutions stemming from the savings and loan crisis.Civil case filings in federal trial courts also declined in 1991, by 5 percent to 208,000.The number of new bankruptcy cases was up more than 21 percent - to nearly 900,000.Personal bankruptcy cases rose 23 percent, far higher than the 7 percent rise in business bankruptcies.
Rehnquist warns of burdening U.S. courts
Chief justice asks Congress to lighten caseload
Chicago Sun-Times
January 1, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
WASHINGTON U.S. - Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist warned in his yearend report that unless Congress acts to lighten the federal court caseload, the quality of justice could be diminished.
"Unless actions are taken to reverse current trends, or slow them down considerably, the federal courts of the future will be dramatically changed," Rehnquist said. "Unless checked, the result will be a degradation in the high quality of justice the nation has long expected of the federal courts."
Rehnquist urged Congress to lighten the federal court caseload and reject proposals that would give federal judges more cases now tried in state courts.
Congress should make it harder for condemned criminals to pursue death sentence appeals that put "repetitive and time-intensive demands on the federal courts," the chief justice urged, as he has before. He suggested closing the federal courts to people in one state who want to sue someone from another state over issues that would be tried in state courts if the plaintiff and defendant lived in the same state.
To prevent putting additional demands on federal courts, Rehnquist cautioned against enactment of a proposed Violence Against Women Act, a Senate measure that he said "could involve the federal courts in a whole host of domestic relations disputes."
He urged Congress not to resurrect a proposal last year that would have made it a federal crime to use a gun to commit a murder. "This federalization of virtually all murders would have been inconsistent with long-accepted concepts of federalism," he said. "It would have swamped federal prosecutors, thus interfering with other federal criminal prosecutions."
Rehnquist voiced concern about how long President Bush and Congress have taken to fill vacancies on the bench.
Legislation that Bush signed 13 months ago created 85 new federal judgeships, but so far the president has sent the Senate 47 nominations and only 22 have been confirmed.
In Illinois, two of the three new federal judgeships created by the legislation have been filled. Illinois Appellate Court Justice Phil
ip G. Reinhard of Rockford, nominated in the closing days of the last legislative session, is awaiting Senate consideration of his nomination to become a federal judge in northern Illinois.
"I urge that immediate attention be given to the process of selecting and confirming federal judges," Rehnquist said.
Caseloads in federal district courts actually declined 4 percent in 1991 from the year before, Rehnquist noted, but he said it was the first decrease in more than a decade. While prosecutors opened fewer narcotics cases, he added, the number of individuals accused of drug crimes increased 4 percent.
There were 5 percent fewer civil suits filed in 1991, the third year the number has declined. As the recession lingered, however, almost 900,000 bankruptcy cases were filed last year, an increase of more than 21 percent.
Rehnquist says courts threatened by changes
Fort Worth Star-Telegram
February 4, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
DALLAS - Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist told lawyers at the American Bar Association's midyear convention today that a whirlwind of changes in the judicial system threatens its effectiveness.
He asked the estimated 2,100 lawyers in attendance to support him in rejecting proposals that would expand the federal jurisdiction.
"The federal courts now stand at a crossroads. Many have spoken and written in recent years about the present impact of the caseload crisis on the courts. The impact is serious now, but it threatens to become even more so," Rehnquist said.
Rehnquist cited sentencing guideline changes that have increased the number of appeals in criminal convictions and sentencing.
He also cited bills pending in Congress, including the Violence Against Women Act, that would open the federal courts and clog them.
"We are not talking in either of these cases about what the substantive rule of law should be," Rehnquist said. "Those who commit murder with firearms and those who perpetrate violence against women should be severely and properly punished - and no one doubts that.
"But the question is whether the federal courts, with their limited resources, should be further burdened with the enforcement of these particular substantive rules."
He also pointed out that new statutes passed by lawmakers have more than tripled the number of drug cases prosecuted in federal courts from 3,732 cases in 1981 to 12,400 in 1991.
The message was well-heeded by the bar association.
"He made the point that there is a crisis in the courts," said Talbot "Sandy" D'Alemberte, president of the bar association, who also said the bar association would be willing to lobby Congress to support Rehnquist's proposals.
"I think he is calling us to walk the halls," he said. "And our response is we are willing to wear out some shoe leather."
The bar association today was considering a proposal to reform the way lawyers are disciplined. Consumer groups have complained that the bar association's current system of disciplining itself is unfair to the clients they represent.
Panel urged to back Violence Against Women Act
Austin American-Statesman
February 7, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
WASHINGTON - Jennifer Katzoff alternated between choked sobs and teetering control as she recalled being raped on a Washington-area college campus four years ago - and the pain and frustration that followed the attack.
Katzoff was among several witnesses to testify before a House Judiciary subcommittee on the proposed Violence Against Women Act.
The legislation would authorize money for rape crisis centers, battered women's shelters, police education, tighter security on campuses and improved lighting near public transportation sites and parks. In addition, the law would require all states to enforce "stay-away" court orders stemming from domestic violence.
The most controversial element of the proposed law would make sex-based assaults a violation of federal civil rights laws. Although that provision would not apply to most domestic violence incidents, it would allow a woman to collect civil damages after proving that a crime was motivated specifically by a hatred of women.
A similar law has already passed the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The packed hearing room heard from a woman who became a paraplegic after her husband shot her in the neck and from another woman who endured nearly two years of relentless physical and mental abuse from her husband.
But no witness moved the room as deeply as Katzoff's tale of how one angry young man - whom she called "my rapist" - had brutally shattered a world she thought safe and promising and how that event has caused her to question the social establishment.
"All my life I had been told that if you achieve, do well and get good grades, your life will be great," she said. "Well, I achieved. I did well. And I got good grades, but it didn't work."
Don't usurp role of state judiciary
Pantagraph, The (Bloomington, IL)
February 11, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
Congress should back off from attempts to make federal crimes out of matters better left to state courts.
That was the message Chief Justice William Rehnquist delivered at the American Bar Association's national convention, and he was on target.
His argument that increasing the workload will decrease the quality of justice in federal courts is unlikely to win over the general public.
More persuasive is his point that "federal courts were always intended to complement state court systems, not supplant them."
The problem is a lot of politicians in Washington, D.C., wanting to look like tough, law-and-order guys. No one wants to be accused of being "soft on crime."
However, leaving basic criminal matters to state courts is not being soft, it is being practical and being respectful of federalism.
Two proposals criticized by Rehnquist ought to be discarded, the Violent Crime Control Act and the Violence Against Women Act. They would cover offenses that could easily be handled in state courts.
An old saying applies in this situation: "Don't make a federal case out of it."
CONGRESS IS CRIPPLING FEDERAL COURTS
Ever-Expanding Number Of 'Federal' Crimes Belong In State Courts Instead
William H. Rehnquist - chief justice of the United States
St. Louis Post-Dispatch
February 16, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
What should be the future role of the federal courts? That is not an idle question, for the federal courts now stand at a crossroads. Many have spoken and written in recent years about the present impact of the caseload crisis on the federal courts. That impact is serious now, but it threatens to become even more so.
Unless actions are taken to reverse current trends, or slow them considerably, the federal courts of the future will be dramatically changed.
Few will welcome those changes. Judges will have less time to spend on individual cases; bureaucratization and increased management strictures will leave judges less freedom to exercise personal judgment. These circumstances will lead judges to have less of a sense of personal responsibility and accountability for the work they produce. Unless checked, the result will be a degradation in the high quality of justice the nation has long expected of the federal courts.
Some may say that we merely need to create more federal judgeships, which in turn would require more courthouses and supporting staff. Although providing additional judicial resources is necessary in the short run, the long-term implications of expanding the federal judiciary should give everyone pause.
As one of my colleagues on the court of appeals has noted, a federal judiciary consisting of more than 1,000 members could be of lesser quality, and would require an attendant bureaucracy of ancillary personnel. It could also end up being divided into an almost unmanageable number of circuits or plagued by appellate courts of unmanageable size, with an increasingly incoherent body of federal law and a Supreme Court incapable of maintaining uniformity in federal law.
Because I believe such a federal court system would be unacceptable, my Annual Report on the Judiciary called for a re-examination of the role of the federal courts. I suggested that the re-examination should (1) recognize the benefits of renewed cooperation with state court systems; (2) consider curtailing some federal jurisdiction; and (3) avoid adding new federal causes of action unless critical to meeting important national interests that cannot otherwise be satisfied through non-judicial forums, alternative dispute resolution techniques or the state courts.
I make this call for re-examination with full knowledge that the scope of federal jurisdiction has been an important political issue since the founding of the nation. Article III of the Constitution sets few limits upon federal jurisdiction. Within its broad warrant, it gives Congress the power to determine the scope of federal jurisdiction and decide when important national interests require the use of this resource.
Two important historical limitations, however, circumscribe the scope of federal judicial power. Federal courts were always intended to complement state court systems, not supplant them. The Framers also intended that the federal courts be a distinctive judicial forum, performing the tasks that state court systems, because of political or structural reasons, could not perform.
Throughout the 200-year history of the federal courts, they have maintained their special qualities, handling complex cases, protecting individual liberties and adjudicating important national concerns. These are the jobs they do best - not those better suited to other forums.
In 1991, the Judicial Conference of the United States opposed portions of several legislative initiatives because they would unnecessarily expand the jurisdiction of the federal courts and intrude into areas of the law that have traditionally been reserved to state courts. S.1241, the Violent Crime Control Act, included provisions that would have provided for federal prosecution of virtually any case in which a firearm was used to commit a murder or crime of violence.
This federalization of most violent crimes would have been inconsistent with long-accepted concepts of federalism. It would have swamped federal prosecutors, thus interfering with other federal criminal prosecutions, and would have ensured that the already overburdened federal courts could not have provided a timely forum for civil cases.
These provisions of S.1241 were successfully eliminated from the conference version of the 1991 crime bill but could resurface if similar legislation is reconsidered in 1992.
I have urged Congress to consider the serious implications to the federal courts if these provisions become law.
Similar concerns exist with pending S.15, the Violence Against Women Act. Although supporting the underlying objective of S.15 - to deter violence against women - the Judicial Conference opposes parts of the bill. The judiciary is concerned that the bill's new private right of action is so sweeping that it could involve the federal courts in a host of domestic-relations disputes.
We are not talking in either of these cases about what the substantive rule of law should be. Those who commit murder with firearms and those who perpetrate violence against women should be severely and properly punished - no one doubts that. But the question is whether the federal courts should be further burdened with the enforcement of these particular substantive rules.
To shift large numbers of cases presently being decided in the state courts to the federal courts for reasons that are largely symbolic would be a disservice to the federal courts, and, more importantly, to the whole concept of federalism.
I would strongly suggest that right now is surely the least propitious time to saddle the federal courts with significant added responsibilities. Federal judges should not be immune from change, any more than are those who do different kinds of work in the public or the private sector. But the role of federal judges has been anything but static during the last decade of our history.
Congress has, over the past decade, enacted major statutory changes in the criminal law in its effort to use every federal resource to bring drug offenders to book. Approximately every two years, Congress has augmented the number of federal drug crimes, increased the severity of drug-related sentences and added a whole host of ancillary provisions requiring the attention of the federal judiciary. These new statutes have more than tripled the number of drug cases prosecuted in the federal courts, to 12,400 cases in 1991 from 3,732 in 1981.
In many jurisdictions, the increase in drug prosecutions has substantially changed the caseload mix before the federal courts, making it next to impossible for many judges to give timely and adequate attention to their civil dockets.
Federal district judges have also, since 1987, been wrestling with the sentencing guidelines mandated by Congress in 1984. This enactment has represented a total turnaround from the previous method of sentencing criminal defendants in federal courts.
Before, the setting of the sentence within statutory limits was almost entirely in the hands of the trial judge, and it was virtually impossible to appeal against such a sentence. Now, elaborate guidelines are in place, which detail exactly how the sentence in each case shall be computed. The guidelines' sentencing tables contain a ''grid'' with vertical ''offense levels'' and horizontal ''criminal history categories.'' Once the judge uses the tables to determine an appropriate offense level and criminal history category, the two are cross-referenced on the ''grid'' to determine the sentence.
The judge may depart from the specified sentence only if aggravating or mitigating circumstances are present. These new guidelines mean that a sentencing hearing before a district judge, which might have taken five or 10 minutes a decade ago, could take an hour or more today. And the new statute grants both the government and the defendant the right to appeal from the sentence so fixed to the Court of Appeals - a right of which both are taking full advantage.
Criminal appeals rose 33 percent in the first year of the sentencing guidelines. Overall, criminal appeals have more than doubled in the past 10 years. In 1991, 21 percent of the almost 10,000 appeals were of sentence only, and another 44 percent were appeals of both sentence and conviction.
In addition to increased drug prosecutions and the sentencing guidelines, the district courts are required by the Civil Justice Reform Act of 1990 to develop civil justice delay and expense reduction plans. These efforts are well underway, and the early implementation district courts have submitted their plans.
These delay-reduction plans will ultimately benefit the courts as well as the bar and litigants, but they, too, take time from the district judge, which he might previously have used for something else. They also add additional management constraints, lessening the traditional freedom of the district judge to manage his or her civil docket.
Whether or not a majority of federal judges would have welcomed these changes, they have had the changes thrust upon them and are dealing with them as best they can. The federal judiciary, far from being immune to or resistant to change, is living through a whirlwind of very substantial changes that have occurred in only the past decade. Additional changes in the federal judiciary - particularly increases in the number of different jobs federal courts are required to do - should be initiated, if at all, responsibly, with due regard to the work federal courts are presently doing.
These courts have always been regarded as courts of limited jurisdiction, very important to our country for performing the rather specialized tasks that Congress from time to time has given them. They cannot possibly become federal counterparts of courts of general jurisdiction, which are required to take virtually all kinds of cases, without seriously undermining their usefulness in performing their traditional role and jeopardizing those qualities that have made them special.
William H. Rehnquist is chief justice of the United States. The preceding is adapted from his speech to the American Bar Association meeting in Dallas.
`Violence Against Women Act' Making Slow Progress
Tulsa World
February 16, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
WASHINGTON - Some recall the Canadian mass murderer who gunned down 14 women engineering students in 1989 while shouting, "I hate feminists." Others begin congressional testimony with calls for 15 seconds of silence - about the interval between batterings of women in the United States.
All are supporters of a bill to give federal civil rights protections to some female victims of violent crime, and they have been making headway with such arguments and devices.
The bill, sponsored by Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., and Rep. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., would provide nearly $600 million to train special police and prosecutorial units in 40 high-crime cities, decrease the high recidivism rate of convicted rapists and build women's shelters.
And for the first time, states would be required to honor protective orders from other states; spouses who cross state lines to continue their abuse would face federal prison terms of up to 20 years.
Under the bill, victims of crimes "motivated by gender" could sue for damages in federal courts. And it is that civil rights provision, modeled on laws prohibiting crimes based on race, that has brought out strong opposition.
Opponents of the measure have succeeded in delaying consideration of the bill with an argument that is apparently as dry as the emotions associated with gender-related crime are raw. They say that such a law would overburden the already crowded federal court system and usurp state responsibilities.
Chief Justice William Rehnquist, in a speech to the American Bar Association on Feb. 4, argued that the proposed civil rights protections for women would "unnecessarily expand" the jurisdiction of federal courts. Rehnquist, who says he supports the measure's "underlying objective ... to deter violence against women," nevertheless said the bill was "so sweeping that it could involve the federal courts in a whole host of domestic relations disputes."
But in House testimony the following day, Biden, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, said that Rehnquist "does not know what he's talking about.
"If you take a (stolen) cow across state lines, it's a federal crime," Biden said. "If we can take care of cows, maybe the vaulted chambers of the Supreme Court may realize it may make sense ... to worry about women."
The debate over the Biden bill comes at a time of heightened concern over violence against women. Highly publicized cases involving the 1989 murders in Montreal and the attack on the Central Park jogger in New York have helped to give the "Violence Against Women Act" prominence, if not an assurance of success, in Congress.
The Bush administration, while raising objections to many aspects of the bill, including the civil rights provisions, has gone on record as favoring the measure's overall intent. Nonetheless, the bill now is on hold - in part because of a long-running dispute between Congress and the legal profession over the increasing jurisdiction that federal courts have been receiving as a result of congressional legislation.
Let the lawyers speak up
The News & Observer
February 20, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist has asked the nation's lawyers for help, and they would be well advised to give it. The legal profession's influence could be decisive in heading off efforts in Congress to make federal offenses of numerous crimes now handled in state courts.
Addressing the American Bar Association, Rehnquist spoke with a voice of reason in what has become a get-tough-on-crime
controversy. Making federal crimes of so many disputes would cause "a degradation in the high quality of justice ... long expected of the federal courts," he said. And he's dead right.
President Bush recently chided Congress for being slow to embrace his proposals on crime. But one of the defects of that package is the extent to which it would stretch the reach of federal courts into the states.
Rehnquist reminded the ABA of two other proposed laws -- the Violent Crime Control Act and the Violence Against Women Act -- that would put severe strains on the time and personnel of the federal courts. One would make a federal crime of any violent offense committed with a gun, and the other would throw federal judges into the midst of a host of domestic disputes.
A majority in Congress wisely refused to get behind such legislation last year. But such measures are still kicking around. And it's becoming politically fashionable to tell worried constituents that changing from state to federal jurisdiction holds the answer to the upsurge in crime across the nation.
As Rehnquist told the ABA, changes as sweeping as those proposed would give the federal courts impossible workloads, and for largely symbolic reasons. And if federal courts should come to supplant rather than complement the courts of the states, the concept of federalism would be dealt a catastrophic blow. So the nation's lawyers have more than enough reason to give voice to their own objections.
CRIME RATE IS RELATIVE
Times Union, The (Albany, NY)
March 22, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
When Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, argues for tougher laws restricting assault rifles, he points to figures that show violent crime on the rise.
When President Bush sought to justify more law enforcement money in his 1992 budget request, he pointed to figures showing that crime has fallen in response to increased federal spending.
Both men cite official Justice Department statistics. But the government's two major crime reports - the Uniform Crime Reports and the National Crime Victimization Survey, often look vastly different.
The UCR is based on actual police reports while the NCVS is based on extensive interviews with people.
From 1979 to 1989, the Uniform Crime Reports show that violent crime increased 21 percent. The National Crime Victimization Survey says it declined 16 percent.
From 1989 to 1990, the UCR shows an 11 percent increase in violent crime. The NCVS records an 8 percent drop.
Rape, according to the UCR, increased 10 percent from 1979 to 1989. The NCVS reported a drop of 38 percent.
Politicians, special-interest groups and journalists often pick the report that best suits their needs. But experts say neither presents an absolutely accurate picture.
The Uniform Crime Reports measure actual crimes reported to police. Some 16,000 law enforcement agencies send their crime statistics to the FBI, which compiles the report.
It does not measure crimes whose victims do not turn in a police report.
The National Crime Victimization Survey, on the other hand, polls 47,000 households - roughly 0.05 percent of the nation's population - about their brushes with crime and extrapolates crime statistics based on those findings. The survey picks up unreported crimes.
"Statisticians may find some value in the national crime survey, but we in government who have to work with violent crime, real crime, victims and policy do not rely on it," said Patrick J. Sullivan, sheriff of Arapahoe County, Colo.
Meanwhile, police, politicians and others continue to use the survey they like best.
Several years ago, Rep. Claude Pepper of Florida was pushing a bill to aid elderly victims of crime. It was far along in the process when someone decided to check the National Crime Victimization Survey, which showed that the elderly were the least victimized of all age groups. The bill died.
Biden, in pushing his "Violence Against Women Act," has repeatedly cited UCR figures that show that rape jumped 6 percent from 1989 to 1990. The NCVS shows a drop.
A recent article in the New York Times "Week in Review" section used the Uniform Crime Report to make the point that the United States has become a "markedly less safe place in the last 30 years." The writer never mentioned the NCVS, which would have painted a different picture.
"It's infuriating when you see that," said James Lynch, assistant professor of justice, law and society at American University. "If people are going to write about crime, they should use both studies, not just what fits their story."
PORN LEADS TO VICIOUS SEX CRIMES
Editor, The Record
Author: MAUREEN MULLVANEY, Glen Rock
May 3, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
The Record's April 14 editorial, "Bad way to fight rape," suggested that we ought not to hold pornographers responsible for the sex crimes that they encourage. This editorial is a splendid example of The Record's callous disregard of the suffering endured by millions of women.
Women everywhere face the omnipresent threat of sexism and violent sexual aggression, which are worsened by the misogynistic teachings of pornography. The editorial writer doesn't mention that pornography, a $9-billion-a-year industry, teaches men from very young ages to objectify women as inhuman props available for their sexual gratification or pent-up anger.
As a daily commuter into Wall Street, I cannot even purchase a morning newspaper without fighting through a vast array of pornographic magazines at the newsstand. I then proceed toward my office, trying to ignore the numerous catcalls and obscenities from strange men along the way. I believe constant pornographic messages are responsible for teaching these men the skills of voyeurism and distorted fantasy toward women, which rob us of our humanity and equal ability to function without th is constant threat of sexual aggression.
The editorial states that it is impossible to prove a definite link between porn and sex crimes. Lengthy studies performed in 1987 at the University of Minnesota revealed that the level of sensitivity toward violent acts dropped dramatically after subjects were asked to view violent pornographic films. A person's sensitivity toward sexual violence decreases proportionally with constant exposure toward it.
The editorial expresses concern for pornographer's rights of free speech protection. Yet authorities would not protect under "free speech" terrorist manuals suggesting ways for people to, say, assassinate a president. Why should some types of suggestive violent literature be allowed under "free speech," and not others?
The editorial makes a vague reference to a bill in the U.S. Senate that would allow victims of sexual hate crimes to hold pornographers accountable for their involvement. This bill is called the "Violence Against Women Act" and is sponsored by Delaware Senator Joseph Biden. Write to your senators, and voice your support for this noble and long-overdue effort to rid society of hate crimes against women encouraged by pornography.
MAUREEN MULLVANEY, Glen Rock
Congress should enact law benefitting women
Chicago Sun-Times
Author: Carole Ashkinaze - Chicago Sun-Times editorial board
May 12, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
As I see is, there are two ways to keep women down.
One is to fight our efforts to control anything as fundamental as our own bodies - with violence if necessary - as Operation Rescue has tried to do with its blockading of abortion clinics.
Another is to try to persuade us we have it so good that advances in any aspect of our lives - such as inclusion in national health studies or protection from violence - are setbacks for men.
The first generates the most headlines, but the second is more effective in the long run because women are uniquely vulnerable to appeals to fairness, even when they have no basis in fact. Having experienced unfairness throughout life, we have a horror of inflicting it on others.
(If you don't believe this, ask yourself when you last apologized for something you didn't do. Studies show that women do this all the time just to keep the peace at home or in the office, whereas men seldom apologize at all.)
Women also share a failing with members of other disenfranchised groups: We want so badly to believe the sweet nothings we hear from our bosses, presidential candidates and TV anchormen that we will grasp at any shred of evidence, however slight, that things are not as bad as they seem.
Still, it is hard to square all this talk about "womanpower" with the facts of life here and on Capitol Hill, including the House's slowness in addressing a bill that would encourage women to prosecute their attackers and create a national commission to develop strategies for combatting violence against women.
To hear some tell it, the nomination by Illinois Democrats two months ago of a black woman to the U.S. Senate was the start of a new world order, and Pennsylvania Democrats' nomination of a woman to oppose Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) is the beginning of the end of political influence for men. In California, there is a "real possibility," a radio commentator said recently, that voters will elect two women to the U.S. Senate. (Do we detect a yearning for the good old days when a candidate such as Richard Williamson wouldn't have had to pretend to be "pro" anything of importance to women?)
Perhaps this will turn out to be "the year of the woman," with women gaining more than the two seats they occupy now out of the 100 in the U.S. Senate. But it's business as usual on Capitol Hill and in the White House, so far as the Violence Against Women Act is concerned despite reports that rapes are up sharply and are among the least-punished of crimes.
From a woman's point of view, one of the most unsettling things about all this talk of womanpower is that the men who will continue to run things with overwhelming majorities in both houses find the possibility of diversity threatening. Another is that none of them is pushing for a House vote on the act, which passed the Senate last year but is bottled up in five House committees.
Even in Illinois, where attorney Ann Breen Greco has tried to rally support among the bar associations for the federal bill in the name of two women lawyers who were killed in acts of violence, only one group - the Women's Bar Association of Illinois - has made it a priority.
If this is the way politics is played in "the year of the women," men have little to fear.
Carole Ashkinaze is a member of the Chicago Sun-Times editorial board.
DON'T BLAME PORN FOR SEX CRIMES
The Record (New Jersey)
Author: CHRIS GILLESPIE, River Edge
May 18, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
In a recent letter, Maureen Mullvaney makes a feeble argument in support of the federal Violence Against Women Act. The act would allow rape victims to sue the publishers of pornography thus making them responsible for the acts of violent criminals. She calls The Record's opposition to the bill a sign of "callous disregard of the suffering endured by millions of women. " Actually, The Record's position shows an understanding that the Violence Against Women Act is misguided, illogical, an d dangerous.
The bill shifts blame for violent crimes from the people committing them to people far removed from the crime. It does so with no hard scientific link at all to the crime. The First Amendment allows for the free spread of ideas, even dangerous ones. Until those ideas are acted upon in a way that breaks the law, no crime has been committed.
The hand of censorship, once moving, is never still. Once they can blame the media for the ills of society, the Jesse Helmses of the world will have free-for-alls. So we might as well gear up to ban "Romeo and Juliet" for encouraging teen suicide, "Cheers" for encouraging drinking, and "L.A. Law" for encouraging dwarf-tossing. And why not hold the public libraries responsible for the ideas in their stacks? For the simple reason that none of these mediums, including the pornography in qu estion, is forcing, let along telling, anyone to do anything.
Blaming pornography provides a convenient way for the criminal to absolve himself. Sane people are perfectly capable of separating fantasy from reality and knowing right from wrong. After that, it's up to them.
The bill is a desperate attempt to "do something" about the terrible crimes that are committed against women. Unfortunately, the Violence Against Women Act does the wrong thing.
CHRIS GILLESPIE, River Edge
RATING POLITICIANS' SUPPORT OF WOMEN
Plain Dealer, The (Cleveland, OH)
May 26, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
The 10 Best Politicians for Women
Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del.: His questioning of Anita Hill at the Clarence Thomas hearings aside, Biden gets high marks for introducing the pending Violence Against Women Act.
Rep. Bill Green, R-N.Y.: Supports important AIDS bills and fought for passage of the recent Civil Rights Act.
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah: Surprise - the man who said Anita Hill took part of her story from "The Exorcist" has a solid record on child care and has backed major AIDS bills. (Also see "Worst" list.)
Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass.: Has a flawless record of legislation that supports women's issues.
Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md.: Women's advocates say she "sticks her neck and her mouth out all the time" on such issues as health care and family leave.
Rep. Patsy Mink, D-Hawaii: Stands up for family leave and financial aid for women going back to school.
Rep. Connie Morella, R-Md.: Women's-rights activists have called her the "best Republican in the House" for her work on AIDS legislation and her support of the defeated Civil Rights Act of 1990, a bill protecting women from discrimination.
Rep. Mary Rose Oakar, D-20, of Cleveland: She secured $42 million for breast-cancer research and is a leader on health-care issues.
Rep. Pat Schroeder, D-Colo.: Earns high marks for her work on family leave, sexual harassment, women in the military and health care.
Rep. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine: Co-sponsor of two key bills: Women's Health and the Violence against Women acts, which would make rape a civil-rights violation with stiff penalties.
The 10 Worst Politicians for Women
Rep. Bill Dannemeyer, R-Calif.: This archconservative introduced legislation that discriminated against people with AIDS and fought to restrict money for AIDS education.
Sen. Bob Dole, R-Kan.: Hostile to family leave, he opposed child-care reforms and the 1990 Civil Rights Act.
Rep. Newt Gingrich, R-Ga.: This Republican Whip fights health-care, family leave and child-care bills. His zeal makes him dangerous, activists say.
Sen. Phil Gramm, R-Texas: Anti-day care, anti-family leave: women's advocates say he is consistently one of Washington's most anti-woman legislators.
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah: It's no surprise he's on this list, considering the fight against the Civil Rights Act of 1990.
Sen. Jesse Helms, R-N.C.: Notorious for voting against the rights of those with AIDS, he opposes additional funding for children's education programs, even Head Start.
Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill.: He is an opponent of civil-rights legislation. In a debate on awarding damages for sexual harassment, he once said, "Someone can show me their buttocks all day."
Sen. Alan Simpson, R-Wyo.: He appalled many during the Thomas hearings. He helped defeat the Civil Rights Act of 1990, a bill protecting women from discrimination.
Sen. Strom Thurmond, R-S.C.: This king of the conservatives votes against child-health and education programs and has been called "anti-women's rights."
Rep. Barbara Vucanovich, R-Nev.: Watchdogs call her an "opponent of everything" that matters to women, even family leave.
Act Would Help Battered Women
Tulsa World
Author: Lucia Perri - chairperson for the OK NOW Violence Against Woman Task Force
August 28, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
An estimated 250,000 battered women and their children are turned away from overcrowded shelters nationwide each year.
Only 50 percent of U.S. cities and counties have hotlines and shelters for battered women. Many of our small towns
and rural counties in Oklahoma are without either service.
The Violence Against Women Act would fund existing shelters and open new shelters. Victim protection orders would be
enforced interstate and new prohibitions on government disclosure of the abused person's address implemented.
In Oklahoma, a rape victim must pay between $400 and $500 for the cost of gathering the medical evidence for the prosecution of their case. Some may be later reimbursed; but under act, these costs will be fully paid.
Since 1980 the number of rapes has increased four times as fast as the total crime rate. As chairperson for the
Oklahoma NOW Violence Against Woman Task Force, I assure
you that we have already decided that this bill will have the single greatest impact on stopping the growth of domestic violence.
Support the Violence Against Women Act.
Family Violence
Tulsa World (OK)
Author: Bobbie Henderson - director of administrative services for Domestic Violence Intervention Services, Inc., Tulsa
September 20, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
While your Sept. 2 editorial "The Violent Among Us" decries violence and cites possible causes, no mention is made of the most alarming form of violence - that which is taking place in millions of American homes.
Domestic violence and child abuse have reached epidemic proportions. According to the FBI a woman is beaten every 15 seconds in the United States. Last year in Oklahoma, over 8,000 cases of child abuse were confirmed; 38 Oklahoma children died due to abuse or neglect.
Single-parent families is listed among the reasons for the increase of violence - for many children, the transition to a single-parent family is the one factor that will prevent future violence. Further stigmatization of single-parent families will have the negative affect of discouraging women from escaping violent relationships that are destroying their children's emotional well being and, in some cases, threatening their very lives.
If we are to reduce violence in our society, we must increase our efforts to reduce violence in the home. Children who grow up in abusive homes are at especially high risk for low performance in school, juvenile crime, drug abuse, teen pregnancy and severe emotional problems.
Become involved with your local domestic violence agency. Also, write your senators and encourage them to support the Violence Against Women Act that is before Congress. This bill provides increased funding for family violence programs.
Every day we are sacrificing our children by minimizing the severity of the effects of abuse in the home. The safety and well being of each of us depends on a significantly stronger response to family violence.
Herschensohn, Boxer clash in debate
Daily Breeze (Torrance, CA)
September 22, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
SAN FRANCISCO -- Clashing on issues across the political spectrum, Republican Bruce Herschensohn and Democrat Barbara Boxer disagreed on health care, abortion rights, taxes, education and defense spending Monday in the second debate of their U.S. Senate campaign.
Their disagreements on a series of questions from a coalition of women's groups were so sharp and consistent that both candidates appeared startled when they found themselves in agreement supporting the pending Violence Against Women Act, and Herschensohn drew appreciative laughter from the generally unfriendly crowd when he joked about reconsidering his position.
"I am the author of the House version of the Violence Against Women Act," Boxer said when asked if she would vote for it.
"I have always supported it. I didn't know you authored it. I will have to reread it," Herschensohn said.
It was one of the few light moments in a generally polite, but serious and intense, debate between Boxer, a liberal five-term Marin County congresswoman, and Herschensohn, a conservative former Los Angeles television commentator and one-time White House aide to then-President Richard Nixon.
Boxer, for example, strongly endorsed abortion rights and congressional enactment of the Roe vs. Wade ruling prohibiting state restrictions on abortion, saying that "a woman's right to choose is the most private and personal decision" any citizen faces.
Herschensohn strongly opposed enactment of the Roe vs. Wade decision, saying the federal government should never have gotten involved in the abortion issue in the first place and should give it back to each state to decide.
The event was sponsored by Women Vote 1992, a coalition of 15 women's groups.
VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN REPORT TIMED TO VOTE ON BIDEN'S BILL
USA TODAY (Arlington, VA)
October 1, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
As morning arrives on a recent September Sunday:
- An 8-year-old girl is raped by her 16-year-old brother in West Virginia.
- In Colorado, a 45-year-old woman is rushed to a hospital with multiple bruises after her husband beats her in a bar.- In Tennessee, a 16-year-old girl shows up at a shelter after being raped by her stepfather the night before.
Three glimpses of violence in America, a tiny fraction of the 21,000 assaults against women reported in the nation each week.
In an unusual government report released Friday, Sen. Joseph Biden, D- Del., issued a compilation of one week's crimes against women, including 200 detailed accounts of brutality between Sept. 1 and Sept. 7. The report also contains detailed accounting of crimes against women in all of 1991.
Timed to focus attention on a pending vote on Biden's Violence Against Women Act, the report should "illuminate the pervasive and serious - indeed, truly tragic - dimensions of violence against women in our society," the senator said in a statement.
Going beyond Department of Justice figures that tally rape but not overall domestic violence, Biden's staff used figures from 20 states that keep detailed figures on violence against women.
Using that base, Biden's report extrapolated the figures to the national population to conclude:
- 21,000 incidents of domestic violence, including murder, rape and aggravated assault, were reported to police each week in 1991.- More than 2,000 women reported each week that they were raped in 1991.- More than 90 women were murdered each week in 1991, nine out of 10 times by men.- A total of 1.13 million women were victims of violence in the same year.
Biden's legislation would provide interstate enforcement of court "stay away" orders against potential abusers of women, allow women greater use of federal courts to seek sexual assault indictments and increase penalties for federal sex crimes.
While the vote could pass the Senate next week, the House version of the legislation, sponsored by Rep. Barbara Boxer, R-Calif., has languished in committee. That means in all likelihood the Biden bill will die this year and have to be reintroduced when Congress returns in January.
DOMESTIC CRIME TOLL:1 MILLION - AT LEAST 3 MILLION MORE UNREPORTED BY WOMEN
Cincinnati Post, The (OH)
October 2, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
About 1 million women fell victim to violent crime last year at the hands of husbands or lovers who attacked them at home or retaliated for a previously reported incident, a Senate committee reported today.
A report released by the Senate Judiciary Committee estimated that there were 1.13 million violent domestic crimes against women in 1991, with at least 3 million more going unreported.
It identified violent crime as murder, rape, aggravated assault or simple assault.
The committee also looked at 200 cases of assault on women during the first week of last month.
Twenty-four of the women either were seeking or already had obtained court orders to protect them from past or potential attackers.
The 200 recent examples were gathered from rape crisis centers, emergency rooms, shelters and police stations.
"Unfortunately, statistics like these have not always spoken loud enough in the past," said Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., the committee's chairman. "We decided to look for the human face behind these statistics."
Among the September cases described were:
A Texas mother whose husband stabbed her to death and hung himself after she tried to get a protective order and enter a shelter for battered women.A 46-year-old woman in New Mexico whose husband beat her and pushed her from a moving car.A 28-year-old New Hampshire woman whose husband tried to strangle her and break her leg, then refused to allow her to seek medical attention until the next day.
Biden and several national women's groups released the report today to call attention to the proposed Violence Against Women Act, which he sponsored.
The legislation calls for allowing women to bring civil cases for attacks committed against them because of their gender; educational programs against domestic violence; and stiffer laws against spouse abuse. The bill is awaiting action by the full Senate, which is getting set to adjourn.
Biden said if the measure is not approved this year, he plans to "make it the single No. 1 priority for me and the judiciary committee" in the next session of Congress.
"I want to raise the consciousness of this country that women's civil rights - their right to be left alone - is in jeopardy," Biden said.
Rosemary Dempsey, vice-president of the National Organization for Women, "it would behoove" senators to approve the bill now, since many of them are facing challenges from female candidates in next month's general election.
"We're talking about a year when women voters are feeling more empowered and doing more to get out the vote," she said. "This is something that women will notice."
The report said domestic disputes accounted for 16 percent of all sexual assaults and 20 percent of all aggravated assaults reported in 1991.
It counted a total of 1.37 million domestic incidents, and estimated that 83 percent of the victims were women, based on reports from states that tally victims by sex.
VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN TOPIC FOR SENATE
16 WOMEN'S GROUPS URGE STRICTER LAWS AGAINST DOMESTIC CRIMES
Akron Beacon Journal (OH)
October 3, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
There were about 1 million attacks on women by their husbands or lovers last year, a Senate committee said FriDAY, as 16 women's groups urged more stringent laws to combat domestic violence.
Another 3 million violent domestic crimes -- murders, rapes and assaults -- went unreported, estimated the Senate Judiciary Committee.
`Women's lives remain controlled by fear, yet Congress has been slow to respond,' said Rosemary Dempsey, vice president of the National Organization for Women. `The incidents recorded in this report are a stark reminder of the misogyny behind the statistics.'
Dempsey pointed out a 1988 U.S. surgeon general's report that listed violence as the No. 1 health risk among women. The Senate committee noted a June 1992 report from Surgeon General Antonia Novello, which said violence is the leading cause of injury to women ages 15-44.
The statistics demonstrate the need for the proposed Violence Against Women Act he sponsored, said the committee's chairman, Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del.
The measure awaits action by the full Senate, which is preparing to adjourn.
Biden's legislation calls for allowing women to bring civil cases for attacks committed against them because of their gender; educational programs against domestic violence; and tougher laws against spouse abuse.
He noted the bill could make rape a federal offense, but said that is justifiable if it is proved that the victim was attacked because of gender.
`It is a hate crime. My objective is to give the woman every opportunity under the law to seek redress, not only criminally, but civilly,' Biden said. ' I want to raise the consciousness of this country that women's civil rights -- their right to be left alone -- is in jeopardy.'
The committee also looked at 200 cases of assault on women during the first week of last month. Twenty-four of the women either were seeking or already had obtained court orders to protect them from past or potential attackers.
The 200 recent examples were gathered from rape crisis centers, emergency rooms, shelters and police stations.
Recent area examples of violence, not included in the 200 studied by the panel, include:
- Michelle Schmidlin, 30, who, while she was staying with relatives in Hinckley Township, allegedly was stabbed to death last month by her husband, Kimlee, 37, of Medina, six days after he was convicted of domestic violence in Medina Municipal Court. He was under a court order to stay away from his wife. He stabbed himself to death after her death, the coroner said.
- A Summit County grand jury apparently relied on Nancy Cox's Battered Woman's Syndrome defense in August in declining to indict her on aggravated murder in the shooting of her husband, Wayne Cox, 45, in their Akron home. Cox, 33, and others testified she had suffered almost constant abuse and trauma from her husband, who had told her he would kill her and their children.
- An ongoing argument between David Wade, 35, of Alliance, and his wife, Robin Wade, 35, apparently resulted in her shotgun slaying Aug. 17 and his arrest for aggravated murder.
The report said domestic disputes accounted for 16 percent of all sexual assaults and 20 percent of all aggravated assaults reported in 1991.
ACT HELPS PROTECT BATTERED WOMEN
Sun Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale, FL)
EDITORIAL
October 4, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
Domestic violence is still one of America's hidden shames.
A new Senate Judiciary Committee report reveals that last year, there were an estimated 1.13 million cases of murder, rape or assault against women.
At least 3 million more violent domestic crimes went unreported, often because women were too afraid, embarrassed or fed up with the system to come forward.
It's sad but true that violence against women has always been a low national priority. Now, Congress can do something to change that by approving the Violence Against Women Act.
This comprehensive legislation would make it a federal crime for anyone to travel across state lines to injure a spouse or intimate partner. It also would require that restraining orders from one state be valid in every other state. Equally important, it would increase funding for educational programs and give states money to improve law enforcement and prosecution of violent crimes against women.
Before taking up this bill, the Senate should study its own Judiciary Committee's report, which found that about 1 million women last year were victimized by husbands or lovers who attacked them at home or retaliated for a previously reported incident.
The committee also examined 200 cases of assault on women reported in the first week of September 1992. Twelve percent of the women either were seeking or had already gotten court orders to protect them from their attackers.
Among them: A Texas mother whose husband stabbed her to death and hung himself after she tried to get a protective order and enter a shelter for battered women and a New Mexico woman whose husband beat her and pushed her from a moving car.
These cases may seem dramatic, but for women who are the victims of domestic assault they're all too real. Passing the Violence Against Women Act won't solve the problem entirely, but it will send a message to battered women across the country that they no longer have to live in fear.
FIGHT DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ON THE FEDERAL LEVEL
Greensboro News & Record
EDITORIAL
October 9, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
When it gets back down to business after the elections, Congress should pass legislation that would help state and local governments combat domestic violence. But it shouldn't create special penalties for abuse determined to be a hate crime.
--
Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., is right to want to provide the country more ammunition for use in the fight against domestic violence. Recent hearings before the Senate Judiciary committee he chairs showed that domestic violence is at epidemic levels in the United States. Battering is the leading cause of injury for American women between ages 15 and 44; 1.1 million U.S. women were battered by their spouse or boyfriends just last year. And that's just the tip of the iceberg, as rapes and assaults often go unreported.
Overall, the senator's Violence Against Women Act contains much that is good. But some editing of the legislation would make it even better.
Biden's bill would authorize more than $400 million for various programs, including rape education from junior high through college. It also would beef up funding for battered women's shelters and would provide money for increased lighting and camera surveillance in parking lots, subways, bus stops and other places where women might be in danger.
The bill also would make legal changes. Attorneys would be barred from irrelevant inquiries into a victim's sexual history in all trials, not just rape trials. And states would be required to honor another state's court order mandating a person to stay away from another. The bill also would make spouse abusers who travel to other states to inflict abuse subject to federal fines.
The bill should be passed, but not before one of its measures is excised. There is no need for the section that would allow some assaults against women to be labeled ``hate crimes'' and that would allow victims of these crimes to bring civil rights suits. Doing that would make unnecessary - and unfair - distinctions among acts that are equally egregious.
Why is a beating of a woman any worse if it is motivated out of a general hatred of women instead of some other misguided notion? The crime is the same, no matter the reason behind it. Abuse is abuse is abuse. Courts should not spend precious time trying to wade through the murky motives of assailants to determine whether gender-hatred was the trigger.
Some may say that Congress has no business getting involved with crimes that are primarily the domain of state and local authorities. But with domestic violence often cited as the number one health risk for women, there's good reason why the federal government should take action.
MUELLER USES TV AD TO ALLEGE BROWN ABUSED EX-WIFE
DEMOCRAT CALLS IT LIE
Akron Beacon Journal (OH)
October 29, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
Republican Margaret Mueller, running in the 13th Congressional District against Democrat Sherrod Brown, began airing a 30-second television ad
WednesDAY, that uses allegations of physical violence made by Brown's ex-wife in 1986 to attack his stand on domestic violence legislation.
`Sherrod Brown says he's for women's rights,' the ad begins. `But the facts show otherwise.'
The ad, using an unidentified female voice, recounts language taken directly from divorce records:
``I am in fear for the safety of myself and my children because of his physical violence and abusive nature, he has completely destroyed my peace of mind.'
It concludes with the female voice saying: `I trust Margaret Mueller to represent me more than Sherrod Brown.'
The ad does not mention that both candidates support Democratic U.S. Sen. Joe Biden's Violence Against Women Act, which toughens penalties for crimes against women.
The issue of Brown's divorce surfaced weeks ago when Brown held a press conference to blast President Bush's veto of a family leave bill.
Brown supports the bill.
Mueller says she supports the concept but fears that passing the bill now would hurt small businesses.
As with the television ad, Mueller then made Brown's divorce, not the bill itself, the focus of her message.
Brown, who has denied ever hurting his wife, called the television ad untruthful.
Several instances of physical confrontations are alleged in divorce papers, but no charges were ever filed.
`This is the slimiest, most disgusting thing that has ever happened to me,' Brown said.
Brown and his ex-wife issued a joint statement acknowledging a bitter divorce. `None of this is relevant to this whole congressional race,' they said.
THE WOMEN'S VOTE
They must guard their interests
Dallas Morning News, The (TX)
Author: Martha Burke
November 1, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
Are you better off now than you were four years ago? Certainly not -- if you are female.
Women have suffered regression in virtually every area of their lives since 1988, when George Bush promised a "kinder, gentler nation' and the Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress swore their dedication to equity for women.
Unemployment, the 10,000-pound gorilla of this election year, is the most devastating statistic. In 1988, unemployment among women was 5.5 percent; now it is 7.5 percent. And women now are the largest group of "discouraged workers,' those who no longer look for work because they have lost hope of finding any.
Those women who do have jobs are increasingly forced to take minimum-wage employment to survive. Women now account for two-thirds of the minimum-wage workers, remaining far below the poverty line even while working full time to support their families. Next to their children, women are the fastest growing group of Americans in poverty, up 10 percent since 1988.
Women's pay still lags behind that of men. In 1988, women working full time made 66 percent of men's wages. They now make closer to 69 percent, but that is mostly due to a steady decline in men's earnings. Some progress.
Failure to make headway is one thing. Outright setbacks are another, and women have suffered two additional setbacks since 1988.
The first was on abortion. Mr. Bush has forbidden medical personnel in clinics receiving federal money from mentioning abortion as an option. And his appointments to the Supreme Court have voted to approve abortion restrictions. The Democrats cannot muster the will to overcome those decisions by passing the Freedom of Choice Act.
The second major setback was on women's safety. In 1988, one woman was raped every six minutes. Today, one woman is raped every four minutes. Domestic violence also is skyrocketing, thanks in part to a bad economy, which increases stress on families. Last year, 1.3 million women reported battering to authorities, and as many as 3 million did not tell anyone.
Battering is the biggest cause of injury to women, according to the American Medical Association. Yet Mr. Bush never has endorsed the Violence Against Women Act, and Congress keeps it bottled up in committee year after year.
In 1920, suffragists won the vote by holding incumbents responsible with a "no-excuses' strategy. Both the Democratic Congress and the Republican president should be held accountable in 1992.
Anti-woman and "read-my-lip-service' candidates should be defeated, regardless of party. Women, now 53 percent of the electorate and capable of controlling the outcome in any race, must vote their own interests first on Election Day.
Martha Burk heads the Center for Advancement of Public Policy in Washington, a liberal think tank involved with corporate accountability and women's equity issues. This column was distributed by the KRTN News Wire.
From A-Z, here's what Clinton pledges to do
Tampa Bay Times (FL)
November 8, 1992
https://infoweb.newsbank.com/
President-elect Bill Clinton made many commitments to voters en route to his election Tuesday.
Here - from A to Z - are some of the policies Clinton has said he plans to implement in his administration after he becomes the nation's 42nd chief executive Jan. 20.
Abortion: Promises to sign a Freedom of Choice Act. Would repeal ""gag'' rule barring federally financed clinics from counseling pregnant women about abortion. Would seek pro-choice nominees for Supreme Court.
AIDS: Wants more funds for research, prevention and treatment. Would appoint AIDS policy director to cut red tape and implement recommendations of National Commission on AIDS. Plans to speed up drug approval process. Promotes national AIDS education and prevention. Would forbid health insurers from denying coverage to HIV-positive applicants. Would lift ban on HIV-positive foreigners traveling or immigrating to the United States.
Arms control: Ratify the START treaty and subsequent agreement of June 1992. Seek a comprehensive test ban treaty. Would maintain ""stable nuclear deterrent.'' Focus research and development on a limited strategic missile defense system in accord with the ABM treaty.
Bureaucracy: Will cut the White House staff by 25 percent. Phase out 100,000 federal positions through attrition. Will require 3 percent across-the-board federal administrative savings.
Children: Fully fund Head Start and other preschool and development programs. Increase legal deterrents to domestic violence. Establish school-based clinics and drug education.
Civil rights: Supports strong enforcement of 1991 Civil Rights Act. Opposes racial quotas. Would sign the Violence Against Women Act to toughen penalties and deter domestic violence. Pledged to sign the ""Motor Voter Bill'' to make voter registration easier. Increase tribal authority in American Indian tribal governments. Supports statehood for Washington, D.C.
Crime: Wants a ""federal police corps'' in which college graduates could serve as law enforcement officers to repay student loans. Federal assistance for crime control. Favors death penalty.
Defense: Cut spending by $60-billion by end of 1997. Redirect funds to rebuilding nation's infrastructure and reducing the deficit. Reduce aircraft carrier task forces from 12 to 10. Build the C-17 transport plane, V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft and up to three Seawolf submarines. Reform defense procurement system.
Disabled: Fully implement and enforce Americans with Disabilities Act. Support increased funding for special education services. Improve enforcement of laws that guarantee equal access to high-quality public education. Seek to integrate disabled children into regular school activities.
Drugs: Appoint a drug czar. Step up federal assistance for drug-treatment programs.
Economic strategy: Invest more than $50-billion a year for four years to spur public and private investment for jobs. Plans to save nearly $300-billion for investments and deficit reduction by cutting spending and closing tax loopholes. Cut entitlement spending by $4.4-billion over the next four years and boost city development through his coordinated economic plan.
Education: Supports parental choice of schooling, but opposes using federal funds to include private schools in the choice. Would give states matching funds for high school and job education. Favors national testing. Allow student loan borrowers to pay back money through payroll deductions and public service. Institute a nationwide apprentice system for high school students not planning to attend college.
Energy: Raise energy-efficiency standards and auto fuel efficiency to 40 mpg. Promote use of natural gas but oppose drilling in Arctic Refuge. Discourage nuclear power.
Environment: Toughen penalties for pollution, including jail in cases of extreme violation. Promote economic incentives, job retraining, community development instead of weakening Endangered Species Act. Assert strong U.S. positions on climate change, sustainable development and species conservation. Follow conservationist approach to land and resource issues, favoring wildlife and wetland protection. Strengthen environmental regulation while favoring economic incentives.
Families: Sign the Family and Medical Leave Act to allow up to 12 weeks vacation time for nursing mothers or workers with sick family members. Support legislation to report deadbeat parents to credit agencies to restrict their borrowing for personal needs. Use Internal Revenue Service to collect child support. Make it a felony to cross state lines to avoid support payments.
Foreign aid: Increase food aid and raise funding for Food for Peace. Reform foreign aid system.
Gun control: Sign the Brady Bill to create a waiting period for purchase of handguns. Seek to ban assault rifles. Favors death penalty.
Health care: Promises health coverage for all Americans. But recipients will have to share costs with uniform payments procedure. Core benefits package includes inpatient hospital care, prescription drugs and preventive programs. Would give employers choice of private insurance scheme or public program. Would establish federal board to set annual national health care expenditure targets. Would raise Medicare B costs for those earning $125,000 a year or more. Supports legislation to deny tax-breaks to drug companies that overcharge. Provide federal support to HIV-infected people and voluntary, confidential AIDS and HIV testing and counseling.
Housing: Encourage home ownership for poor and first-time buyers. Raise FHA mortgage insurance to 95 percent of average home price. Give federal support for low-income, long-term housing buyout programs.
Industry: Begin a $20-billion a year ""Rebuild America Fund'' to invest in high-speed transportation, communications, environmental technology. Provide tax breaks for companies investing in research and development.
Israel and the Middle East: Supports current Arab-Israeli peace negotiations. Shows more sympathy for Israeli position than his predecessor. Has called Jerusalem undivided capital of Israel.
Jobs: Expand job training programs. Wants employers to spend 1.5 percent of payroll for continuing education and training of all workers.
Labor: Increase minimum wage in line with inflation. Seek repeal of Taft-Hartley Act to level playing field between labor and management.
Line-item veto: Ask Congress to give the president the right to veto parts of bills to ""eliminate'' pork-barrel spending.
Military abroad: Cut U.S. troop strength in Europe and Asia to between 75,000 and 100,000 instead of the previous administration's target of 150,000. Keep U.S. forces in northeast Asia ""as long as North Korea presents a threat to our South Korean ally.''
National security: Institute a five-year plan, reducing military personnel and spending, shifting focus of conventional forces from East Bloc to diversified projection of power wherever U.S. national interests threatened. Ask allies to shoulder more of international defense burden.
Ozone: Endorses predecessor's commitment to phase out production of chlorofluorocarbons and other chemicals that erode Earth's stratospheric ozone layer and heighten risk of skin cancer.
Police: Seek to put 100,000 new police officers on the beat. Create National Police Corps and encourage unemployed veterans and active military officers to join law enforcement.
Quality of life: Propose comprehensive strategy to raise American living standards with ultimate goal of phasing out welfare dependence.
Rebuilding America: Create Rebuild America Fund with an annual $20-billion federal investment for four years, leveraged wit state, local, private sector and pension fund contributions. User fees such as toll roads and solid-waste disposal charges will help guarantee the investments.
Small business: Offer new-enterprise tax credit providing 50 percent tax exclusion for those making long-term investment in new businesses. Give tax breaks for investment in new plants and productive equipment needed to compete internationally. Provide affordable health care to small enterprises.
Space: Strive for greater international cooperation with Europeans, Russia and Japan. Continue National Aeronautic and Space Administration projects aimed at understanding Earth.
Taxes: Raise taxes on families earning more than $200,000 to pay for middle class tax cut. Give middle class a choice of tax breaks: either a tax credit for children or a reduction in tax rate. Favors a 50 percent exclusion of capital gains from taxation for ""long-term'' investments in new businesses.
Trade: Strive to reduce trade barriers by completing GATT talks. Endorse North American Free Trade Agreement, with reservations, but seek tougher environmental and labor protections in the NAFTA.
Urban development: Seek to boost city development through national economic strategy, incentives and grants to revitalize urban economy. Expand education, job training and child care services. Provide federal subsidies for cities that adopt revitalization programs. Community Development Block Grants to rebuild roads, bridges, etc. Create network of community development banks to provide small loans for low-income entrepreneurs and inner city homeowners. Favors urban enterprise zones with ta x and regulatory incentives for businesses to set up shop in inner cities.
Veterans: Opposes opening Veterans Affairs hospitals to non-veterans. Seeks to cut red tape for outpatient services and benefits. Supports veterans' mental health programs. Gradually scale down military forces from active duty to National Guard. Provide early retirement incentives, including prorated pensions. Allow military personnel a one-year educational paid leave of absence to train for civilian professions. Convert closed military bases to homeless shelters, with priority for veterans. Will make resolution of the POW-MIA issue a national priority, insisting on full accounting before normalizing relations with Vietnam.
Welfare: Scrap the current welfare system and install one that will not make welfare ""a way of life.'' Provide training, education and child care to recipients for two years, after which they must take a job in the private sector or do community service.
Women: Support efforts to combat sex discrimination. Sign Women's Health Research Act and similar legislation to give more attention to women's health problems. Seek to lift the ban on the use of fetal tissue for cancer cure research, particularly breast cancer. Support testing of RU-486, the controversial French abortion drug. Strive to hire and appoint more women at all levels of government. Enforce tough sexual harassment guidelines in all government agencies. Additional tax relief to families with children.
X-ratings: Defend freedoms of speech and artistic expression ""by opposing censorship or "content restrictions' on grants made by the National Endowment for the Arts.''
Youth: Require corporations with multimillion dollar federal contracts to create after-school, or summer, employment programs for urban and rural disadvantaged youth.
Yugoslavia: Support U.S. participation in United Nations airlift to besieged Bosnia. Would seek U.N. authorization for air strikes to defend relief operation and give U.S. ""military support'' for such an operation.
Zeros: Even if Clinton does everything he says he will, after four years there will still be nine zeros in a $141,000,000,000 deficit.
No comments:
Post a Comment