[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 13]
[Senate]
[Pages 19356-19357]
[From the U.S. 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 
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

[[Page 19357]]

     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.

                          ____________________