[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 116 (Tuesday, September 26, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9258-S9259]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
THE VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT OF 2000
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I rise today to again urge the Senate to
bring up and pass, S. 2787, the Violence Against Women Act of 2000,
VAWA II--we are quickly running out of time to reauthorize it. The
authorization for the original Violence Against Women Act, VAWA,
expires at the end of this week on September 30, 2000. There is
absolutely no reason to delay this bill which has overwhelming
bipartisan support.
I have joined Senators from both sides of the aisle at rallies and
press conferences calling for the immediate passage of this
legislation. The bill has 70 co-sponsors and is a significant
improvement of the highly successful original VAWA which was enacted in
1994. There is no objection on the Democratic side of the aisle to
passing VAWA II. Unfortunately, there have been efforts by the majority
party to attach this uncontroversial legislation to the ``poison pill''
represented by the version of bankruptcy legislation currently being
advanced by Republicans. I do not agree with stall tactics like this
one and believe we should pass VAWA II as a stand-alone bill, without
further delay.
Yesterday, in New Mexico, where he was releasing funding made
available through VAWA for one of the country's oldest battered women's
shelters, the President made a public plea for Congress to reauthorize
VAWA, claiming, ``[T]his is not rocket science. Yes we're close to an
election . . . But it is wrong to delay this one more hour. Schedule
[[Page S9259]]
the bill for a vote.'' I urge my colleagues to heed the cry of the
President as he speaks on behalf of the almost 1 million women around
this country who face domestic violence each year.
The President called domestic violence ``America's problem'' and I
could not agree with him more. When we talk about reauthorizing the
Violence Against Women Act we are not just talking about a big
bureaucratic government program the effects of which we can't really
see. With this bill we are talking about reauthorizing critical
programs that have had a tremendous immediate effect on how this Nation
handles domestic violence and its victims. We are at risk of
jeopardizing what has been one of the most effective vehicles for
combating domestic violence if we let this law expire.
I have heard from countless people in Vermont that have benefitted
from grant funding through VAWA programs. VAWA II ensures the success
of these crucial programs such as the Rural Domestic Violence Grant
program. These grants are designed to make victim services more
accessible to women and children living in rural areas. I worked hard
to see this funding included in the original VAWA in 1994, and I am
proud that its success has merited an increased authorization for
funding in VAWA II. Rural Domestic Violence and Child Victimization
Enforcement Grants have been utilized by the Vermont Network Against
Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault, the Vermont Attorney General's
Office, and the Vermont Department of Social and Rehabilitation
Services to increase community awareness, to develop cooperative
relationships between state child protection agencies and domestic
violence programs, to expand existing multi disciplinary task forces to
include allied professional groups, and to create local multi-use
supervised visitation centers.
I witnessed the devastating effects of domestic violence when I was
the Vermont State's Attorney for Chittenden County. In those days, long
before the passage of the Violence Against Women Act, VAWA, there were
not support programs and services in place to assist victims of these
types of crimes. Today, because of the hard work and dedication of
those in Vermont and around the country who work in this field every
day, an increasing number of women and children are being aided by
services through domestic violence programs and at shelters around the
Nation. Lori Hayes, Executive Director of the Vermont Center for Crime
Victim Services, and Marty Levin, Coordinator of the Vermont Network
Against Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault, have been especially
instrumental in coordinating VAWA grants in Vermont.
Let the Senate pass S. 2787, the Violence Against Women Act 2000
without further delay before its critical programs are jeopardized. It
was cleared for passage by all Democratic Senators two months ago and
should be passed today. It is past time to reauthorize and build upon
the historic programs of the Violence Against Women Act and do all that
we can to protect children from the ravages and lasting impact of
domestic violence.
A Washington Post editorial today called the failure to pass the
reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, ``inexplicable
neglect,'' claiming that ``[t]here seems to be no good reason practical
or substantive, to oppose reauthorization of the Violence Against Women
Act.'' That could not be more true Mr. President. I ask unanimous
consent that the editorial from the September 26, 2000 edition of the
Washington Post be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From the Washington Post, Sept. 26, 2000]
Inexplicable Neglect
There seems to be no good reason, practical or substantive,
to oppose reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act.
Originally passed in 1994, the act provides money to state
and local institutions to help combat domestic violence. It
is set to expire at the end of the month. Its reauthorization
has overwhelming bipartisan support. But House and Senate
leaders have yet to schedule a vote.
Versions of the bill have been favorably reported by the
judiciary committees of both chambers. Both would expand
programs that during the past five years have helped create
an infrastructure capable of prosecuting domestic violence
cases and providing services to battered women. Since the
original act was passed, Congress has devoted $1.5 billion to
programs created by it. The House and Senate bills differ,
but both would authorize more than $3 billion in further
support during the next five years. There is room to debate
the proper funding level relative to other priorities, a
matter which will be determined later by appropriators; and
the programs won't end immediately if the act lapses, because
funds have been approved for the coming year. But failing to
reauthorize would send the wrong message on an important
issue and, more important, could threaten future
appropriations.
With time in the 106th Congress running out, the Violence
Against Women Act may become a casualty of neglect rather
than of active opposition. But that's no comfort. Congress
ought to find the time to pass it before leaving town.
____________________