[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 70 (Wednesday, May 16, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3226-S3230]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN REAUTHORIZATION ACT of 2012

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, last month, the Senate came together and 
passed the Leahy-Crapo Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 
2012. Our legislation takes some much needed steps to help the most 
vulnerable victims of domestic and sexual violence, and it was passed 
with significant bipartisan support. The Leahy-Crapo Violence Against 
Women Act was an example of what we accomplish when we put politics 
aside and work to find real solutions to real problems facing real 
Americans.
  Few laws have had a greater impact on the lives of women in this 
country than the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). By shining a light 
on the insidious crimes of domestic and sexual violence, this law(s 
initial passage nearly 20 years ago sent a powerful message that 
violence against women would no longer be tolerated. The days of 
dismissing these crimes with a joke or a shrug were over. The 
resources, training and law enforcement tools provided by VAWA 
transformed the criminal justice and community-based response to abuse. 
It gave support and protection to the victims who for generations had 
been blamed, humiliated and ignored.

[[Page S3227]]

  With each reauthorization of this landmark law, Congress has 
repeatedly shown its bipartisan commitment to ending domestic and 
sexual violence by building on the protections in the initial 
legislation and expanding the reach of VAWA to meet the remaining unmet 
needs of victims.
  The bill that I introduced with Senator Crapo, and which passed the 
Senate with an overwhelming bipartisan majority just last month, is 
based on the successful tradition of preserving and enhancing 
protections. It is based on months of work with survivors, advocates, 
and law enforcement officers from all across the country and from 
across the political spectrum. We purposely avoided proposals that were 
extreme or divisive and selected only those proposals that law 
enforcement and survivors and the professionals who work with crime 
victims every day told us were essential. That is why the provisions in 
the Senate bill have such widespread support. More than 1,000 Federal, 
state, and local organizations have endorsed it, including service 
providers, law enforcement, religious organizations and many, many 
more.
  The inclusive, open process of drafting this legislation is also why 
the Senate bill always had strong bipartisan support. It was a 
bipartisan effort from the beginning with eight Republican Senators 
cosponsoring the bill and seven more joining Democratic and Independent 
Senators in voting to pass the bill. We were able to move able to move 
to the bill without a filibuster, to consider amendments, which were 
rejected, and to pass the bill with almost 70 votes. We adopted a bill 
of which the Senate can be proud, because it serves the interests of 
the American people while improving support and protection for victims 
of domestic violence and sexual assault.
  I am alarmed the other body--the House--has chosen a different path. 
Instead of building on the broad bipartisan support for the Senate-
passed Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act, Republican members 
of the House Judiciary Committee last week took up a bill, H.R.4970, 
that they crafted in back rooms without the input of those who dedicate 
their lives to helping victims. This afternoon the House Republican 
leadership brought that same bill to the floor, with only minor 
modifications that do little to respond to the urgent concerns of 
victims, and is forcing an up or down vote while blocking any attempts 
to modify the legislation in response to the concerns raised by victims 
and service providers around the country. Their legislation not only 
fails to include the critical improvements in the Senate bill that 
would increase protections for Native-American women, gay and lesbian 
victims, battered immigrant women, and victims on college campuses or 
victims in subsidized housing, it actually rolls back existing 
protections leaving many victims more vulnerable to sexual and domestic 
abuse. Among the most troubling provisions are those that drastically 
undercut important, longstanding protections that are vital to the 
safety and protection of battered immigrant victims.
  As a result of this misguided effort, the House bill is strongly 
opposed by many of the leading organizations that know these issues 
best, including the National Network to End Domestic Violence, the 
National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, the National Alliance to 
End Sexual Violence, the American Bar Association, the YWCA, the 
Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights and many, many more.
  The thousands of local advocates and service providers around the 
country that make up the National Network to End Domestic Violence 
warned in a letter to the House Judiciary Committee that H.R. 4970 
would (weaken, rather than enhance, protections for victims of domestic 
violence.( Sue Else, the President of that organization, lamented:

       This is an unprecedented departure from this effective 
     law(s original intent. Thousands of victim advocates across 
     the country recommended substantial improvements for the 
     latest reauthorization, and the U.S. Senate accepted those 
     recommendations in a bipartisan way. It is alarming that the 
     House Judiciary Committee has not done the same.

  The American Bar Association has stated:

       Unlike the recently passed Senate bill (S. 1925), which 
     reflects discussions with more than 2,000 advocates and 
     experts across the country, H.R. 4970 represents a retreat 
     from the fight against domestic and sexual violence. It fails 
     to add critical improvements to address the needs of 
     underserved populations, like victims who are members of 
     faith communities and those who are denied services because 
     of their sexual orientation or gender identity, and strips 
     critical protections from existing law.

  The YWCA, the largest provider of services for battered women in the 
country, calls the House bill a ``dangerous bill that puts the lives of 
millions of women across the nation at risk.'' These organizations 
represent those on the front lines against domestic and sexual 
violence. They are motivated by their desire to see all victims get the 
help they need.
  Likewise, a number of faith-based organizations, such as the U.S. 
Conference of Catholic Bishops, the National Association of 
Evangelicals, and nearly 20 other religious institutions have joined a 
letter stating that they are ``deeply troubled'' by the ``many 
provisions [in the House bill] that actually would roll back 
protections in current law for battered non-citizens, making them more 
vulnerable and, in some cases, endangering their lives.''
  House Republicans are headed down the wrong path. In fact, when the 
Senate rejected their alternative to our bipartisan bill last month by 
a strong bipartisan vote of only 37 in favor and 62 opposed, I had 
hoped that would end the partisanship and the gamesmanship and we would 
be able to move forward together to reauthorize the Violence Against 
Women Act. I was encouraged to see the lead sponsor of the Republican 
alternative, the distinguished senior Senator from Texas, do just that 
and join with us to support the bipartisan Senate bill upon final 
passage. I commended Senator Hutchison for doing so. Likewise, we were 
buoyed by the support on final passage by the Senior Senator from 
Arizona, the Senators from Tennessee, Senator Coates of Indiana, 
Senator Hoeven of North Dakota, Senator Portman of Ohio and Senator 
Vitter of Louisiana.

  Despite all this, House Republicans seem determined to destroy this 
bipartisan effort. As evidenced by the vote they are forcing today, 
they are intent on proceeding with their bill to roll back victim 
protections and insistent that it be done without the opportunity to 
consider the better, Senate-passed bill or, for that matter, any other 
amendments to their ill-conceived effort to undercut the Violence 
Against Women Act.
  The House Republican bill not only fails to protect more victims, but 
actually weakens existing protections. I fear that it puts more lives 
at risk.
  In its Statement of Administration Policy, the Obama administration 
correctly opposes the House bill, H.R. 4970, as a measure that ``would 
undermine the core principles of the Violence Against Women Act.'' It 
notes the House Republican bill ``retreats'' from the progress 
represented by the protections included in the bipartisan Senate-passed 
bill and ``weakens'' critical protections for victims. The House 
provisions ``senselessly remove existing legal protections, undermine 
VAWA's core purpose of protecting victims of sexual assault and 
domestic violence, frustrate important law enforcement objectives, and 
jeopardize victims by placing them directly in harm's way.'' It 
concludes with a threatened veto recommendation since the House measure 
``rolls back existing law and removes long-standing protections for 
victims of domestic violence and sexual assault.'' Never before, in 
either Republican or Democratic administrations, Republican- or 
Democrat-controlled Houses or Senates, has the Violence Against Women 
Act been used to increase the dangers to women and so consciously 
disregard the unmet needs of our most vulnerable victims. Never before.
  Last week the White House Advisor on Violence Against Women noted 
that the House Republican bill ``adds burdensome, counter-productive 
requirements that compromise the ability of service providers to reach 
victims, fails to adequately protect Tribal victims, lacks important 
protection and services for LGBT victims, weakens resources for victims 
living in subsidized housing, and eliminates important improvements to 
address dating violence and sexual assault on college campuses.'' She 
is right.
  The closed process by which the House Republican leadership insisted

[[Page S3228]]

its ill-conceived bill be rubberstamped breaks House Republican 
promises to allow amendments and proceed by an open amendment process. 
The House Republican bill's roll back of protections breaks the promise 
of the Violence Against Women Act to protect victims of domestic 
violence and sexual assault. Never before has the Violence Against 
Women Act been used to increase the dangers to women and so consciously 
disregarded the unmet needs of our most vulnerable victims.
  A recent New York Times editorial entitled ``Backwards on Domestic 
Violence'' had it right: ``House members on both sides of the aisle who 
are serious about combating domestic violence must work to defeat this 
atrocious bill.'' That sentiment was reinforced by a recent Los Angeles 
Times editorial which stated: ``Republicans in the House should drop 
their attempts to undermine the Violence Against Women Act and instead 
move swiftly to reauthorize and strengthen the existing program, as the 
Senate has already done.''
  Today The Washington Post reports on another study by Human Rights 
Watch documenting sexual violence and harassment of female farmworkers. 
Congress should not be turning its backs to these battered and abused 
women. We should be moving forward promptly to adopt the provisions of 
the Senate-passed bill to protect the most vulnerable among us, women 
who are doubly victimized by abusers and by the fear that they have no 
recourse.
  I thank Senators Murray, Menendez and Shaheen for their strong 
statements in support of the Senate-passed Violence Against Women 
Reauthorization Act yesterday. I am disheartened by the decision of the 
House Republican leadership to try to push through their destructive 
bill over the clear objections of those very victims it is supposed to 
serve. I urge the supporters of the bipartisan Senate bill to continue 
our efforts to see that this carefully crafted legislation that meets 
the needs of so many people is finally passed into law.
  I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the Statement 
of Administrative Policy, the editorials from the New York Times and 
the Los Angeles Times, and the letters to which I have referred.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                   Statement of Administration Policy


     H.R. 4970--Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2012

          (Rep. Adams, R FL, and 40 cosponsors, May 15, 2012)

       The Administration strongly opposes H.R. 4970, a bill that 
     would undermine the core principles of the Violence Against 
     Women Act (VAWA). VAWA is a landmark piece of legislation 
     that first passed the Congress in 1994 and has twice been 
     reauthorized with overwhelming bipartisan support, each time 
     with important improvements to strengthen VAWA. The Act 
     transformed the Nation's response to violence against women 
     and brought critically needed resources to States and local 
     communities to address these crimes.
       H.R. 4970 retreats from this forward progress by failing to 
     include several critical provisions that are part of the 
     Senate-passed VAWA reauthorization bill. For instance, H.R. 
     4970 fails to provide for concurrent special domestic 
     violence criminal jurisdiction by tribal authorities over 
     non-Indians, and omits clarification of tribal courts' full 
     civil jurisdiction regarding certain protection orders over 
     non-Indians. Given that three out of five Native American 
     women experience domestic violence in their lifetime, these 
     omissions in H.R. 4970 are unacceptable. The bill also fails 
     to include language that would prohibit discrimination 
     against LGBT victims in VAWA grant programs. No sexual 
     assault or domestic violence victim should be beaten, hurt, 
     or killed because they could not access needed support, 
     assistance, and protection. In addition, H.R. 4970 does not 
     include important improvements to the Clery Act found in the 
     Senate-passed bill that would address the high rates of 
     dating violence and sexual assault experienced by young 
     people in college and other higher education institutions. 
     The bill also weakens critical new provisions in the Senate-
     passed bill that would improve safety for victims living in 
     subsidized housing.
       H.R. 4970 also takes direct aim at immigrant victims of 
     domestic violence and sexual assault by removing critical 
     protections currently in law. H.R. 4970 allows abusers to be 
     notified when a victim files a VAWA self-petition for relief, 
     and it eliminates the path to citizenship for U visa 
     holders--victims of serious crimes such as torture, rape, and 
     domestic violence--who are cooperating with law enforcement 
     in the investigation or prosecution of these crimes. These 
     proposals senselessly remove existing legal protections, 
     undermine VAWA's core purpose of protecting victims of sexual 
     assault and domestic violence, frustrate important law 
     enforcement objectives, and jeopardize victims by placing 
     them directly in harm's way.
       The Administration urges the House to find common ground 
     with the bipartisan Senate-passed bill and consider and pass 
     legislation that will protect all victims. H.R. 4970 rolls 
     back existing law and removes long-standing protections for 
     victims of domestic violence and sexual assault--crimes that 
     predominately affect women. If the President is presented 
     with H.R. 4970, his senior advisors would recommend that he 
     veto the bill.
                                  ____

                                           National Network To End


                                            Domestic Violence,

                                      Washington, DC, May 7, 2012.
     Hon. Lamar Smith,
     House Judiciary Committee, House of Representatives, 
         Washington, DC.
     Hon. John Conyers,
     Ranking Member, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Conyers: The 
     National Network to End Domestic Violence, which represents 
     all of our nation's state and territorial domestic violence 
     and dual domestic violence-sexual assault coalitions, their 
     2,000 member programs and the millions of victims they serve 
     every year, opposes HR 4970, a bill introduced by 
     Representatives Sandy Adams (R FL) and Eric Cantor (R VA) to 
     reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA).
       VAWA was initially passed in 1994 and subsequently 
     reauthorized in 2000 and 2005 to meet the needs of victims. 
     HR 4970 fails to meet, and in fact, weakens, rather than 
     enhances, protections for victims of domestic violence. The 
     network of survivors and advocates who work on a daily basis 
     with courts, law enforcement, prosecutors, shelters, academic 
     and medical institutions need VAWA's tools--its laws and 
     programs--to help keep victims safe. All of us are alarmed 
     that HR 4970 takes the wrong direction and will be dangerous 
     for victims.
       We are particularly concerned with provisions that erode 
     critical safety measures for immigrant victims seeking safety 
     and justice, fail to fix a jurisdictional issue for victims 
     on tribal lands who are beaten by non-tribal perpetrators 
     with near impunity, and turn a blind eye to lesbian, gay and 
     other marginalized communities. If enacted, this bill would 
     jeopardize victims' lives and embolden perpetrators of 
     violence. HR 4970 also wrongly grows bureaucracy through the 
     costly and excessive auditing of small nonprofits. Resources 
     would be better spent training and supporting those important 
     organizations that provide these lifesaving services and 
     advocacy. And finally, the emergency housing transfer section 
     in this bill, which is intended to help victims flee violent, 
     dangerous perpetrators without becoming homeless, is weakened 
     by allowing the adoption of transfer policies to be 
     ``voluntary'' by owners, managers and public housing 
     agencies.
       The U.S. House of Representatives has the opportunity to 
     develop and pass a bipartisan VAWA that meets the needs of 
     victims. HR 4970 is not such a bill. We look forward to 
     working with the House Judiciary Committee and all Members of 
     Congress to develop a bill that is reflective of the needs of 
     all victims. Please contact Paulette Sullivan Moore, NNEDV's 
     Vice President of Policy, at [email protected] with any 
     questions.
           Sincerely,
                                                         Sue Else,
     President.
                                  ____

                                                      May 7, 2012.
     Hon. Lamar Smith,
     Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, House of 
         Representatives, Washington, DC.
     Hon. John Conyers,
     Ranking Member, Committee on the Judiciary, House of 
         Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Conyers: On behalf 
     of the undersigned faith leaders and faith-based 
     organizations concerned about victims of domestic violence, 
     human trafficking, sexual assault, and other forms of 
     violence, we write to express our concerns about Title VIII 
     of H.R. 4970, legislation to reauthorize the Violence Against 
     Women Act (VAWA), which we understand the House Committee on 
     the Judiciary plans to mark up tomorrow.
       Faith communities are on the front lines, identifying 
     victims, providing refuge, referring victims and their 
     families for services, and offering hope and healing. In 
     times of crisis, victims often turn to faith communities and 
     leaders for support and moral guidance because they see 
     places of worship as a sanctuary from the horrors they have 
     experienced. Through our ministry with victims, we have 
     learned that abusers often exploit a victim's immigration 
     status, leaving individuals extremely vulnerable and afraid 
     to report the abuse to law enforcement, assist in the 
     prosecution of crimes, and seek services.
       Congress created VAWA in 1994, and it has voted twice since 
     then to reauthorize the law, each time with broad bipartisan 
     support. However, we are deeply troubled by Title VIII of 
     H.R. 4970, as introduced. Title VIII contains many provisions 
     that actually would roll back protections in current law for 
     battered non-citizens, making them more vulnerable and, in 
     some cases, endangering their lives. We urge you to strike 
     these provisions from the bill before the measure is brought 
     before the full House of Representatives for a vote.

[[Page S3229]]

       VAWA is an effective tool in combatting the devastating 
     crimes of domestic violence and providing lifesaving programs 
     and services. We urge Congress to preserve and improve 
     protections for vulnerable immigrant victims.
           Sincerely,
       Noel Castellanos, CEO, Christian Community Development 
     Association; Rev. John L. McCullough, Executive Director and 
     CEO, Church World Service; Wendy Tarr, Director, Clergy and 
     Laity United for Economic Justice; Alex Baumgarten, Director 
     of Government Relations, The Episcopal Church; Luis Cortes, 
     President, Esperanza; Alexia Salvatierra, Director of Justice 
     Ministries, Southwest California Synod Evangelical Lutheran 
     Church in America; Patrick Carolan, Executive Director, 
     Franciscan Action Network; Gideon Aronoff, President and CEO, 
     Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society; Orlando Crespo, National 
     Director, La Fe Multi-Ethnic Ministries, Intervarsity 
     Christian Fellowship/USA; Janet Mock, CSJ, Executive 
     Director, Leadership Conference of Women Religious.
       Linda Hartke, President and CEO, Lutheran Immigration and 
     Refugee Service; Rachelle Lyndaker Schlabach, Director, 
     Mennonite Central Committee, U.S. Washington Office; Salam 
     Al-Marayati, President, Muslim Public Affairs Council; Leith 
     Anderson, President, National Association of Evangelicals; 
     Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, President, National Hispanic Christian 
     Leadership Conference; Rev. Gabriel Salguero, President, 
     National Latino Evangelical Coalition; Jim Wallis, President 
     and CEO, Sojourners; Johnny Young, Executive Director, 
     Migration and Refugee Services, U.S. Conference of Catholic 
     Bishops; Lynne Hybels, Willow Creek Community Church; Deborah 
     Fikes, Executive Advisor, World Evangelical Alliance; Stephan 
     Bauman, President and CEO, World Relief.
                                  ____

                                         American Bar Association,
                                      Washington, DC, May 7, 2012.
     Committee on the Judiciary,
     U.S. House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Representative: On behalf of the American Bar 
     Association, with nearly 400,000 members, I write to express 
     our opposition to H.R. 4970, the Violence Against Women Act 
     reauthorization bill introduced by Rep. Sandy Adams (R-FL), 
     which is scheduled to be considered by the House Judiciary 
     Committee on May 8, 2012. We urge members of the committee to 
     oppose the bill.
       VAWA has been the single most effective federal effort to 
     respond to the epidemic of domestic violence, dating 
     violence, sexual assault and stalking in this country. The 
     act has ensured that legal and social services are available 
     to survivors, and that law enforcement, prosecutors, judges, 
     attorneys and advocates are well-trained and equipped with 
     cutting-edge resources to effectively address these crimes in 
     their own communities.
       Reauthorization of VAWA is critical, providing Congress 
     with the opportunity to amend the act in order to combat 
     domestic and sexual violence more effectively. For example, 
     in 2000, Congress created the Legal Assistance to Victims 
     grant program. It also created the U visa for immigrants who 
     are victims of serious crimes and who have cooperated with 
     authorities in the prosecution of the perpetrator, and it 
     authorized funding for increased protection of older 
     individuals and individuals with disabilities. And in 2005, 
     it became unlawful to deny an individual housing assistance 
     simply because the individual is a victim of domestic 
     violence, dating violence, sexual assault or stalking. 
     Congress also created a new grant program to improve court 
     responses to these crimes.
       H.R. 4970 does not continue this tradition of improvement. 
     Unlike the recently passed Senate bill (S. 1925), which 
     reflects discussions with more than 2,000 advocates and 
     experts across the country, H.R. 4970 represents a retreat 
     from the fight against domestic and sexual violence. It fails 
     to add critical improvements to address the needs of 
     underserved populations, like victims who are members of 
     faith communities and those who are denied services because 
     of their sexual orientation or gender identity, and strips 
     critical protections from existing law.
       The provisions of H.R. 4970 that significantly undermine 
     protections available to vulnerable immigrant victims of 
     violence are of particular concern. Before enactment of VAWA, 
     abusive U.S. Citizens and Legal Permanent Residents (LPRs) 
     were able to use the immigration laws as a mechanism to 
     further abuse and control their immigrant spouses and 
     children. Perpetrators of domestic violence routinely would 
     thwart, or threaten to thwart, the visa petitioning process. 
     In creating a special application process for battered 
     spouses and children of U.S. Citizens and LPRs, lawmakers 
     recognized that many victims of domestic abuse were 
     unwittingly victimized by the immigration system as well.
       The current VAWA green card application process involves a 
     ``self-petition,'' so that the abuser is not involved at all 
     in the process and prohibits the government from releasing 
     information about the existence of a VAWA immigration case to 
     the abuser or others. H.R. 4970 removes those critical 
     protections. A forced choice between deportation or safety 
     from an abusive spouse or trafficker is the precise evil that 
     the original self-petitioning provisions of the VAWA were 
     intended to eliminate. H.R. 4970 creates obstacles for 
     immigrant victims seeking to report crimes and increases the 
     danger to victims by eliminating important confidentiality 
     provisions.
       Because it fails to improve upon our nation's response to 
     domestic violence and sexual assault by ensuring that all 
     populations are protected and in fact rolls back critical 
     protections in existing law, the ABA urges you to oppose H.R. 
     4970. VAWA is a critical tool in the arsenal to address 
     domestic and sexual violence, and it must be improved during 
     this reauthorization process to address the needs of all 
     victims and hold more offenders accountable.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Thomas M. Susman,
     Director, Governmental Affairs Office.
                                  ____

                                                      May 7, 2012.
       Dear Representative: As the largest provider of battered 
     women's services in the United States, with over 1300 
     locations in 47 states, the YWCA is deeply invested in the 
     safety and health of all women. The YWCA serves over half a 
     million women each year through its anti-violence programs, 
     providing much needed access for victims of violence to 24-
     hour crisis hotlines, emergency shelter, counseling services, 
     legal assistance, child care, economic empowerment programs 
     and transitional housing. The YWCA strongly opposes any 
     legislation that puts victims' lives at risk, and as such, 
     opposes H.R. 4970 to reauthorize the Violence Against Women 
     Act (VAWA) introduced by Rep. Sandy Adams (R-FL).
       For nearly 18 years, VAWA has provided a national, 
     streamlined response to address domestic violence, sexual 
     assault, dating violence and stalking. H.R. 4970 cuts back on 
     critical provisions outlined in S. 1925, passed last month, 
     that protect some of the most vulnerable women in our 
     communities, and as a result, is a dangerous bill that puts 
     the lives of millions of women across the nation at risk.
       Under H.R. 4970, immigrant women will be required to 
     conduct interviews for U-visa petitions in person, which does 
     not take into consideration the unfortunate reality of many 
     victims of violence where their movement is strictly limited 
     or closely monitored by their abusers. In addition, H.R. 4970 
     would eliminate key confidentially measures by allowing USCIS 
     officers to notify and interview the abusers. Not only will 
     this keep immigrant victims from reporting abuse, but it will 
     put their lives at risk if they do proceed to apply for a U-
     visa. Studies indicate that the two most heightened periods 
     of danger for victims of abuse are when they are pregnant and 
     when they decide to leave an abusive situation--disregarding 
     the importance of confidentiality and informing the abuser of 
     the victims' intent to leave will undoubtedly lead to greater 
     danger for the very people that this bill purports to assist.
       H.R. 4970 disregards the epidemic rates of violence in 
     Indian Country by allowing batterers to avoid prosecution on 
     Tribal lands. By doing so, the bill fails to hold 
     perpetrators of violence accountable for their actions and 
     sends a clear message to Native victims of violence to remain 
     silent and endure abuse. Without explicitly addressing the 
     issue of accountability, Native victims will continue to 
     remain fearful of reporting crimes of abuse. H.R. 4970 also 
     strips all support for LGBT victims of abuse, claiming that 
     they are not the `right' victims. The YWCA supports all women 
     and victims of abuse regardless of sexual orientation, 
     immigration status, or race, and does not stand for isolating 
     entire subsets of the community that face unique barriers to 
     accessing services. By excluding the LGBT community in the 
     bill, H.R. 4970 it prevents providers from serving ALL women, 
     and no one should be denied help based on their sexual 
     orientation.
       H.R. 4970 fails to provide inclusive provisions that 
     address the unique needs of underserved communities, which 
     would in turn endanger the lives of millions of women across 
     the nation. The YWCA supports legislation that is trauma 
     informed, victim centered, and evidence based, and is opposed 
     to any provisions that force victims to negotiate their 
     safety when seeking assistance from abusive situations.
       In short, we urge you to oppose H.R. 4970.
       Please contact Desiree Hoffman, Director of Advocacy and 
     Policy at [email protected] or Qudsia Jafree, Field and 
     Policy Coordinator at [email protected] should you have 
     questions.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Desiree Hoffman,
     YWCA USA, Director of Advocacy and Policy.
                                  ____


                       [From the New York Times]

                     Backward on Domestic Violence

       In an all-too-rare show of bipartisanship, 15 Senate 
     Republicans joined with the Democratic majority last month to 
     reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act, the landmark 1994 
     law that is key to efforts against domestic violence, sexual 
     assault and stalking.
       Unfortunately, the lopsided 68-to-31 Senate vote halted 
     G.O.P. opponents only temporarily. The House Judiciary 
     Committee last week approved its version of the 
     reauthorization bill, which not only omits improvements the 
     Senate bill made to the law but also removes existing 
     protections for immigrant women, putting them at greater risk 
     of domestic and sexual abuse.
       The Senate's measure ensures that victims are not denied 
     services because they are gay or transgender. It also strives 
     to ensure that domestic violence crimes committed by non-
     Indian men in tribal communities are prosecuted. The Senate 
     bill also would modestly

[[Page S3230]]

     expand the availability of special U-visas for undocumented 
     immigrants who are victims of domestic violence. That move 
     was supported by law enforcement to encourage victims to come 
     forward and testify against their abusers.
       The regressive House alternative removes these and other 
     improvements, including new protections for students on 
     college campuses. The House measure would eliminate a 
     confidentiality requirement in current law that protects the 
     identity of immigrant women who file domestic violence 
     complaints against a spouse who is a citizen or legal 
     resident and allows the women to apply for legal status on 
     their own.
       House Republicans claim there is a big fraud problem in 
     this area, but there is no hard evidence of that. And their 
     plan to end the centralized handling of these issues by a 
     Vermont-based office would undermine the government's ability 
     to detect untruthful stories.
       House members on both sides of the aisle who are serious 
     about combating domestic violence must work to defeat this 
     atrocious bill. If that fails, the Senate will need to insist 
     on fixing it during the reconciliation process.
                                  ____


                    [From latimes.com, May 15, 2012]

            Partisanship and the Violence Against Women Act

       The House needs to reauthorize the law, without limits, as 
     it has in the past, so Republicans can demonstrate that 
     helping battered women is more important than political 
     games.
       The political climate in Congress is so noxious these days 
     that even a law that originally passed with overwhelming 
     bipartisan support because it provided much-needed help to 
     abused women is now a partisan issue. That's shameful. 
     Republicans in the House should drop their attempts to 
     undermine the Violence Against Women Act and instead move 
     swiftly to reauthorize and strengthen the existing program, 
     as the Senate has already done.
       First enacted in 1994, the law has been renewed twice 
     without a fight. Last week, however, some of the same GOP 
     lawmakers who once endorsed the law retreated, voting in 
     committee to strip out provisions designed to protect 
     immigrants. Under VAWA as it has long existed, if an 
     immigrant married to a U.S. citizen or a green-card holder--
     and therefore eligible to stay in the country permanently--
     can show evidence of abuse, he or she may file independently 
     without having to rely on the abusive spouse. VAWA's gender-
     neutral protections apply to legal and illegal immigrants and 
     allow the victim to file confidentially.
       Confidentiality is crucial. As the Republican-led House 
     Judiciary Committee noted in its 2005 report to reauthorize 
     VAWA and expand protections, without such guarantees, an 
     abuser could try to derail a spouse's green-card application 
     or push to have him or her deported. A battered woman whose 
     application depends on her abusive husband certainly might 
     think twice about filing if she knew her abuser would be 
     notified that she was seeking help without him.
       Eliminating the confidentiality provision is one of several 
     changes House Republicans would like to make to weaken the 
     law. They argue that the changes are necessary to combat 
     fraud, in which immigrants falsely claim to have been abused 
     in order to obtain visas. But where are the data and studies 
     that fraud is a problem? Immigrant victims who petition for 
     visas under VAWA are already required to supply ample 
     evidence of abuse, such as police reports or medical records. 
     And applications undergo intense scrutiny. In fiscal 2011, 
     immigration officials denied nearly a third of those 
     petitions.
       The House reauthorization bill also seeks to undercut a 
     provision that allows undocumented immigrants who assist in 
     prosecutions of serious crime for U visas, and ultimately 
     obtain green cards. The proposed changes would allow victims 
     to obtain temporary visas only. Surely, even those lawmakers 
     who embrace anti-immigrant legislation can appreciate that U 
     visas help protect American citizens too, by encouraging 
     witnesses to step forward without fear of deportation. That's 
     why the program enjoys the backing of many law enforcement 
     groups.
       The House will vote on Wednesday. It should reauthorize 
     VAWA without limits, as it has in the past, and demonstrate 
     that helping battered women, those who are immigrants, isn't 
     a partisan issue.

                          ____________________