| Progress on VAWA II |
Several important provisions of the Violence
Against Women Act of 1998 (H.R.
3514) were included in a re-authorization of the Higher
Education Act which has now passed both the House and the Senate.
On July 10th, the Senate approved amendments that require a National
Baseline Study to document the effectiveness of campus procedures in
addressing sexual assault. Other inclusions cover grants to improve campus
security and responses to violence against students, a prohibition against
hate crimes and a fine on schools that are delinquent in reporting
campus crime statistics. Sens.
Paul Wellstone (D-MN) and Arlen
Specter (R-PA) were leaders in this effort. |
| Great news! |
Nearly $1 billion worth of Violence Against Women programs,
including STOP (Services, Training, Officers, and Programs) grants to police
and grants to support police pro-arrest policies, was approved 416 to
0 by the House of Representatives on June 11th, thanks to an amendment
offered by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI). Other provisions included were for
prevention of custodial sexual assault by prison correctional staff, standardization
of sexual assault examinations and training procedures, federal witness
protection for victims of domestic violence, clarification of Full Faith
and Credit for Protection Orders to be recognized across state lines, grants
for training of health professionals in this area, and many other important
components from H.R. 3514, the Violence Against Women Act of
1998 (VAWA II). The amendment, which comprised about one-fourth of
the appropriations re-authorization of the H.R. 3514, was attached
to the Child Protection and Sexual Predator Punishment Act (H.R.
3494). |
| Again, great news! |
Now that Sen. Joe Biden
(D-DE) has introduced his Violence Against Women bill (S.
2110) which contains some of the provisions of the House bill (H.R.
3514), Sens. Patty Murray
(D-WA) and Paul Wellstone (D-MN) will be introducing additional components
to complete the package. With the recent action in the House (plus 124
co-sponsors!), and passage of the Sexual Predators bill, there is a stronger
possibility that we may see some action this Congress on VAWA II. Ask your
Representative and Senators to become co-sponsors and to push for hearings. |
| More good news! |
Sen. Paul Wellstone (D-MN) successfully attached an amendment (S.
2057) to the Department of Defense Authorization Bill (S.
2132) to enhance compensation for dependent abuse victims of military
personnel. DV survivors would receive comprehensive health care benefits
during a period of transitional compensation, up to 36 months. Other amendments
that would assist survivors of domestic violence in the military are in
the works, including one to clarify provisions of VAWA with regard to military
protective orders where there is a change in duty station or command assignment. |
| Also, very good news! |
Lots of positive things were said about the Hate Crimes Prevention
Act of 1998 (S.
1529) at a hearing was held July 8th by the Senate
Judiciary Committee. The bill, which would expand the scope of the
federal government's ability to prosecute such
crimes is sponsored by Sens.
Ted Kennedy (D-MA), Arlen Specter (R-PA) and Ron
Wyden (D-OR). At a press conference prior to the hearing, NOW president
Patricia Ireland spoke in support
of the bill's main intent: adding sex-based, sexual orientation-based
and disability-based hate crimes to Sec. 245, Title 18 of the U.S.
code. The House Judiciary Committee held similar hearings on July 22nd
and heard testimony from survivors of hate crimes in support of H.R.
3081, a bipartisan bill sponsored by Rep. Chuck Schumer (D-NY),
John Conyers (D-MI), Connie
Morella (R-MD) and Bill McCollum
(R-FL), among others. |
| Oversight hearings on VAWA I postponed |
Unfortunately, a re-authorization hearing, originally planned for July
22nd by the Senate Judiciary Committee, for various Violence
Against Women (VAWA I) programs due to expire in 1998 was postponed.
NOW president Patricia Ireland was to have testified. The purpose of the
hearing was to assess the effectiveness of VAWA I programs like STOP grants,
police pro-arrest grants and the National
Domestic Violence Hotline (1-800-799-SAFE which receives up to
8,000 calls for help each month). Contact committee chair, Sen.
Orrin Hatch (R-UT), and urge him to re-schedule the hearing soon. Such
an event will also be a good opportunity to communicate to Senators the
importance of expanding these effective programs and initiating
new ones, as the Violence Against Women Act of 1998 (S.
2110/H.R.
3514) would do. |
| NOT good news... |
A hearing was held on
July 17th in the House Judiciary Committee, Crime Subcommittee, Bill McCollum
(R-FL), chair, on whether the federal RICO
law ( Racketeer- Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) should be
amended. Abortion rights opponents in Congress would like to change RICO
so that it cannot be used against such organizations as Operation Rescue
and PLAN, the Pro-Life Action Network, who use violence to deny women the
right to abortion. Abortion opponents claim that the use of RICO in these
instances impinges upon First Amendment (free speech and assembly) rights.
Proposed legislation suggests, curiously, that extortion be deleted
from the statute as a prosecutable crime (H.R.
4245. the Civil RICO Clarification Act of 1998). The hearing
occurred in the wake of the April 21st Chicago jury decision finding Joe
Scheidler and his co-defendants guilty of 120 counts under the law (including
extortion) in the class action case brought by NOW. [See NOW
v. Scheidler lead attorney Fay
Clayton's testimony at the hearing posted at the NOW website.] |
| They never give up |
Shortly after the NOW v. Scheidler decision was reached, Rep.
Tom Coburn (R-OK) was prepared to offer an amendment on the floor which
would have limited the use of the RICO act, but withdrew it at the last
moment. The amendment was to have been attached to a dangerous bill, H.R.
1252, the so-called Judicial Reform Act, which imposes various
restrictions on federal judges and is destined for a Presidential veto.
Our opponents would love to overturn the NOW v. Scheidler decision
and when they can't win in court, they are running to their friends in
Congress to re-write the laws or limit the powers of the judiciary. |
| Abortion Procedures Ban Veto Override Set |
As observers had predicted, the House voted to override the President's
veto of the Abortion Procedures Ban
(also known as D & X Abortion Ban) by a vote
of 296-132 on July 23rd. The Senate vote, reportedly, will take
place in mid-September -- in time for abortion opponents to campaign
against incumbents who opposed the ban. Such efforts were not particularly
successful in the 1996 election campaigns. Activists are encouraged to
call or write their
Senators who opposed the ban to thank them and to provide reinforcement
for the upcoming vote.The Vote is available at: http://www.senate.gov/activities/105-1/vote_00071.html |
| A surprise win |
House abortion rights supporters, led by Rep. Nita
Lowey (D-NY), won a major victory on July 16th when the House adopted
by 224-198 the FY
99 Treasury/Postal Appropriations bill which contained an amendment
that would require Federal Employees
Health Benefit (FEHB) plans that cover prescription drugs to also cover
prescription contraceptive drugs and devices. Exempted from the requirement
are the five Catholic health care plans which are offered to federal employees.
The partial win followed extensive maneuvering by reproductive rights opponents
to prevent adoption of the amendment by using various arcane rules and
parliamentary procedures. Thank Rep. Lowey for her dedicated efforts. |
| Heated exchange in contraception debate |
At one point in the intense floor debate over whether FEHB plans
would cover prescription contraception, abortion arch-opponent, Rep. Chris
Smith (R-NJ), told fellow House members that nearly all forms of contraception
are unacceptable as they cause abortion to occur. He offered an amendment
to reclassify several common methods of contraception, including the IUD,
as "abortifacients". The amendment was rejected by a vote of 198-222. |
| Government employees' abortion coverage |
Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) offered
an amendment to repeal the ban that prevents federal employees from
choosing health insurance that also covers abortion services.
This onerous provision denies 1.2 million women of reproductive age coverage
of that service under the Federal Employees' Health Benefits Plan.
Her amendment to the Treasury/Postal spending bill was voted down by 183-239. |
| Dangerous amendment |
In a widely criticized action, the House voted 223-202 on June 24th
to bar the Food and Drug Administration from using funds for review
and approval for any drug which induces abortion, including Mifepristone
(also called RU-486).
This measure was offered by Rep. Tom Coburn (D-OK) , a physician and avowed
abortion rights opponent, as part of the FY
99 Agriculture spending bill. Critics charged that Congress
is substituting politics for sound scientific judgement, again. Despite
Rep. Coburn's intense efforts, the Senate passed their version of the bill
without a similar amendment. It is now critical to pressure the conference
committee delegates to accept the Senate version and reject limiting the
FDA's authority. |
| Level funding parental consent for family planning |
Title
X, family planning funds of $203 million (level funding), minus
the President's requested $15 million addition, were approved by the House
Labor, HHS and Education Appropriations Subcommittee in late June. A letter
was sent to the committee signed by 137 Republican abortion opponents urging
that parental consent/notification be required in all Title X programs.
An extensive, targeted campaign by right-wing anti-abortion religious groups
is having an impact. The House Appropriations Committee voted 32-34 on
July 14th to accept an amendment by reproductive rights opponent, Ernest
Istook (R-OK), to the Labor/HHS Appropriations bill. It requires teen-agers
seeking prescription contraception at Title X clinics to have parent consent
or to have clinics notify parents five business days in advance of providing
services. It isn't clear when the appropriations bill will come to the
floor, so activists are urged to call,
fax or e-mail their Representative as soon as possible to urge the
defeat of this amendment when the measure comes to the House floor. |
| Hyde Amendment extended to Medicare |
The prohibition against federal reimbursement for abortion services
(except in cases of threat to life, rape and incest) was extended to the
Medicare program by committee action. Although Medicare primarily
covers health care for older persons, it also provides coverage to about
1.9 million non-elderly disabled women, about 627,000 of whom are under
the age of 45. The provision is included in the Labor, Health and Human
Services/Education appropriations measure. |
| Broad conscience clause planned |
Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX) plans to offer an amendment which would allow
any health professional, institution, or insurance plan to refuse
to cover, provide or even refer for abortion services. It will
be proposed for addition to the Labor, Health and Human Services/Education
spending bill. This is the broadest "conscience clause" exemption to be
ventured yet by abortion opponents in Congress. |
| 'Teen Endangerment Act' advances |
In late June, the House passed a terrible bill, the Child
Custody Protection Act (S.1645/H.R.
3682), that would make it a federal crime for anyone to transport
a minor across a state line to obtain an abortion unless the
young woman has satisfied the requirements of her home state's parent notification
and involvement laws. Of questionable constitutionality, the bill would
also jail grandmothers, ministers, counselors and single parents, in some
states, and would certainly endanger the health of young women. Efforts
in committee to exempt family members were defeated. The Senate will be
voting on this in September after they come back from the recess, and the
President has threatened to veto the bill. Please
call your Senator and urge him/her to oppose this dangerous measure. |
| Military abortions still prohibited |
Amendments offered on both the House and Senate sides to enable military
servicemen and women and military dependents to obtain abortions at overseas
military hospitals using their own funds were defeated recently.
Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA) and
Sens. Patty Murray (D-WA)
and Olympia Snowe (R-ME) made
the valiant but futile efforts. The Senate vote on this amendment to the
FY 99 Defense authorization bill was 44-49. The House vote on it was
190-232. Please thank these three determined women. |
| Child support loses to credit cards |
In June the House of Representatives passed the so-called Bankruptcy
Reform Act of 1998 (H.R.
3150) which would revise bankruptcy law in a number of ways that
could be harmful to women. Although the bill's backers claim to have addressed
problems with regard to child support and alimony (past due support payments
competing with credit card bills), the problem was not resolved in the
final version. Essentially those same problems and others -- such as
the potential for a dependent ex-spouse to lose household goods or become
responsible for the credit card debts of her husband -- still exist in
the Senate version, S.
1301. When the measure comes to the floor of the Senate, Sen. Ted
Kennedy (D-MA) may attempt to attach his minimum wage hike bill and
Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) may
attach a pay equity measure. Be sure to call
your Senator and urge him or her to oppose S. 1301. |
| We were right |
Now that there is evidence from New Jersey that family caps
(denial of additional benefits when a child is born) for women on welfare
may lead to an increase in abortions, the author of this draconian measure,
Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ)
is sponsoring a bill to prohibit states from imposing family caps (H.R.
4066). Information about increased numbers of abortions was
withheld by New Jersey officials during the welfare repeal debate and while
advocates for the poor, like NOW, were arguing that more abortions would
be the result. Activists are encouraged to communicate with members on
the need to remove the family cap. |
| Social Security ''privatization'' |
Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY)
introduced a resolution (H.
Res. 483) acknowledging that the Social
Security fund is not in crisis, that increased contributions to
the Social Security Trust Fund would not be necessary until well into the
21st century, and that any effort to change the Social Security system
should be undertaken with the greatest of care. Meanwhile, the Republican
leadership is scheduling a bevy of hearings on this issue -- one
that they hope to push in the next Congress. Recent studies show that recipients
will likely end up with less income under any of the major privatization
schemes. Huge investment and banking firms are mounting a multi-million
campaign to support privatization. Reportedly, women and people of color
are being targeted in this campaign--dont' be fooled! |
| Women members send message |
A bipartisan group of 40 women members of Congress wrote Vice
President Al Gore, prior to his appearance at the Providence, RI
Town Hall meeting on Social Security, urging the administration
to address the issues that face women in reviewing proposed changes. They
noted that "women retiring in the next 20 years will have less than one-third
the income necessary to retire comfortably, a situation that is greatly
exacerbated for women of color" and that several proposals under consideration
would make this situation worse. |
| Rollback efforts die down |
At least in Congress, efforts by Republicans to repeal Affirmative
Action programs have all but stopped, with such successes as
safeguarding the Disadvantaged
Business Enterprise program (DBE) in federal transportation spending.
DBE helps small businesses owned by women and people of color be more competitive
in federal contracting. Opponents are pouring more effort into state and
local initiatives to repeal or scale back Affirmative Action programs,
such as Washington's
State Proposition 200 and a court challenge to the Houston ballot
initiative, passed last November, which re-affirms support for city
Affirmative Action programs. There will be, however, an oversight hearing
in Washington on activities of the Civil
Rights division of the Department of Justice in July, mainly to allow
Republican critics to question President Clinton's interim appointee, Bill
Lann Lee. |
| Census fight continues |
For some time, House Republican leaders have been fighting administration
plans to conduct a sample method to confirm the year 2000 Census count.
The sampling procedure would help determine whether the census is accurate
and if any groups have been undercounted. People of color, homeless persons,
and women and their families in shelters are frequently hard to find by
census-takers; the census missed as many as four million people in 1990.
Rep. Juanita Millender-McDonald
(D-CA) is heading up an effort to support census sampling. An accurate
count will have an important bearing on Year 2000 Congressional and legislative
re-districting and could make a substantial difference as to which political
parties will be in control. The Senate (where there is general agreement
on the issue) is poised to support the $848 million for the census, but
the near-term House floor vote on funding is expected to be fractious.
Let your
House member know that an accurate census count is important
to women and that sampling is a useful way to determine whether any groups
have been undercounted. |
| A Break for Teen Welfare Moms |
An amendment to the Higher
Education Act, pushed by Sen. Paul
Wellstone (D-MN), would extend time limits on vocational education
from 12 to 24 months for teen parents on welfare
who are pursuing postsecondary education. The provision would allow teen-agers
receiving Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) to
continue their education (as defined as a "work activity") for a longer
period of time. Activists are encouraged to call White House aide Bruce
Reid (who is reportedly a hold-out on the administration supporting this
important amendment) and urge him to work for its passage. Calls should
be made as soon as possible; the White House main number is 202-456-1414. |
| Title IV, WEEA funds limited |
As was done last fiscal year, funding
to states under Title IV of the Civil
Rights Act was eliminated in the Health and Human Services/Education
Appropriations bill by the House, but funding for the regional centers
was kept level at a little over $7 million. The Women's
Educational Equity Act (WEEA) funds were authorized at
last year's level of $3 million. These programs discourage
discriminatory practices in educational institutions and assure that girls,
women, and people of color are offered programs which promote equality
of opportunity. Both Title IV and WEEA face an
imminent threat, though, with a pending House floor vote on a bill
sponsored by Rep. Joseph R. Pitts
(R-PA) that would block-grant many elementary and secondary education programs
assisted by federal funds. Urge your Representative to oppose such a measure. |
| Protecting discrimination |
On July 7th, the Republican leadership
introduced an amendment to the Commerce, Justice, State Appropriations
bill which would overturn President Clinton's Executive
Order (EO) banning workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation.
Rep. Joel Hefley (R-CO) is heading up this attack on gay and lesbian rights.
The intention of the EO was to standardize federal government policy by
adding sexual orientation to the list of protected categories where
discrimination is currently prohibited. The Republican's Dear Colleague
letter claimed, as is their usual refrain, that the EO grants "special
privileges" to gays and lesbians. At the same time, right-wing organizations
launched a well-financed national advertising campaign, claiming that homosexuality
like kleptomania or drug-addiction can be "cured." NOW and other activist
organizations demonstrated
at the Capitol on July 22nd against these attacks. |
| Riggs Amendment attacks equal benefits. |
On July 30, the amendment to the Veterans
Administration and Housing Appropriations bill proposed by Rep.
Frank Riggs (R-CA ) which prohibits
funding to San Francisco if the city continues its requirement that city
contractors provide health care benefits to domestic partners passed
the House by a vote of 214-212. The measure has a chilling effect on any
local policies which assure the same benefits to gays/ lesbian couples
as received by heterosexual couples. The city of San Francisco, currently
the only city with such a requirement, stands to lose $260 million in federal
funding. Activists are urged to call
their Senators and ask them to oppose a Riggs-like anti-equal benefits
amendment. |
SUMMARY
LEGISLATIVE UPDATE