Providing for Consideration of H.R. 4970, Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2012, and Providing for Consideration of H.R. 4310, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I raise a point of order against H. Res. 656 because the resolution violates section 426(a) of the Congressional Budget Act. The resolution contains a waiver of all points of order against consideration of the bill, which includes a waiver of section 425 of the Congressional Budget Act, which causes a violation of section 426(a).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I raise this point of order not necessarily out of concern for unfunded mandates, although there are some unfunded mandates in the underlying bill, H.R. 4970; rather, I am here today because this is the only opportunity to voice opposition to this bill, given the strict, closed terms of our debate today.
It is baffling to me, Mr. Speaker, that we would be so shut out of today's debate and that House Republicans would so completely abandon any pretense of bipartisanship on a bill like the Violence Against Women Act. This bill has always been a bipartisan effort, and I would argue that on an issue like this, it is incredibly important to have a well-rounded discussion.
We obviously disagree about the key elements that are critical to include in a Violence Against Women Act reauthorization. Well, why not allow us to have a healthy debate? More importantly, Mr. Speaker, why not allow us our chance to try to improve the legislation before us?
Our allies in the domestic violence and sexual assault advocacy community have literally spent years compiling input and data from service providers, law enforcement, and victims themselves about what we must do to update VAWA in a reauthorization. And I am here to be a voice of protest because their input is invaluable; yet, for the very first time, their input has been cast aside.
Last night I offered a substitute, along with Representative Conyers and Representative Lofgren, that would have allowed us to consider the Senate-passed version of the Violence Against Women Act, a version which I proudly introduced in March here in this House of Representatives. This legislation was passed in the Senate with sound bipartisan support and includes the improvements that have been endorsed by a broad array of individuals and organizations, including law enforcement agencies.
But, unfortunately, today we will not be allowed to vote on the Senate bill. We will have to vote on the Adams bill, which is now officially opposed by over 325 organizations. Yes, Mr. Speaker, you heard it right--325 organizations.
I would like to share my time with my colleagues who are here with me today and would like for their voices to be heard. So, Mr. Speaker, with your permission, I am going to yield to a number of Members for unanimous consent, the first of whom is Ms. Yvette Clarke from Brooklyn, New York.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the ladies who are submitting their statements for the Record.
The Members who join me today are just a few of the many people who would like to be here to offer their suggestions for improving the bill and to highlight the stories of women, men, and children in their district and communities who have experienced atrocious violence. There are lessons to be learned from their stories, and it is unwise and unkind of us to turn a blind eye.
I'm thinking of Rosalind in Milwaukee, who was killed by her girlfriend, Malika, and her family had concerns about her over-possessiveness. But, of course, this is an LGBT relationship, and an order for protection may have been ignored without these provisions.
I think of another person in my district, Diane's story, 26 years old, married to a non-Indian, beaten. Over a hundred incidences--slapped, kicked, punched, and living in terror. She called for help several times but no one ever came to her rescue. She was living on a tribal land.
The Violence Against Women Act has been a lifeline for victims of domestic violence and sexual assault. It has allowed us to hold perpetrators accountable and to pave pathways out of violence for victims--all women. And since VAWA passed in 1994, domestic violence has dropped by more than half. We must not turn back, Mr. Speaker. We must not weaken or repeal some of VAWA's lifesaving protections.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I do appreciate the woman walking us through the protocols for the unfunded mandates. And I would submit to her that the National Network to End Domestic Violence, who does a point-in-time counting of domestic violence services nationwide, would indicate that it costs not only personal anguish, but there are costs in society, actual fiscal costs, to not protecting women who are suffering in violent situations.
Right in my own State of Wisconsin, 714,000 women have been assaulted, raped, or stalked by an intimate partner. This number actually exceeds the population of the entire city of Milwaukee. Imagine the cost to employers when people don't show up at work. Imagine the cost in emergency rooms when people show up battered and bruised and broken and have no health insurance.
Approximately half a million of these women were fearful or concerned for their safety. Two hundred and eighty thousand Wisconsin women, 12.7 percent of our population, have been stalked in their lifetime. Imagine the cost of additional police work when these women call the police and nothing has been done in terms of making arrests and asking for accountability.
A study of childhood exposure to violence in Milwaukee has found that 16 percent of Wisconsin adults report having experienced recurring violence between adults in their childhood. Imagine the loss of productivity at schools. There's often a lot of talk about kids being inattentive in school and not being able to pass and succeed in school. Next to hunger, imagine the cost of witnessing and experiencing violence in the home as a cost to society.
I would now like to yield to the gen tle lady for a question.
There were several amendments that were introduced in the Rules Committee last evening, and I was wondering if you were aware of any amendments that were adopted after we left the Rules Committee last evening. I know there had been a hearing. I was wondering if any of the amendments that Democrats had introduced were adopted.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. MOORE. The manager's amendment, thankfully, was adopted, because the manager's amendment did have one little piece in there that helps out immigrant women. But there are 325 groups and organizations, everything from national women organizations to evangelical women and the bishops, that oppose even the manager's amendment because they say that not only are there just simply rollbacks to the Violence Against Women Act, but it actually puts immigrant women in danger, as the balance is tipped from current law in favor of these batterers, sexual assaulters, abusers, and killers.
I would like to yield to the gen tle lady for one more question.
Will this body ever have an opportunity to vote on the bipartisan bill from the Senate that passed 68 31? Will this body ever have the opportunity? Will that bill ever be before us?
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I cannot assume what this body will do in the future. I am one member of the Rules Committee and the Education Committee. I do not have control over that, and I don't believe anybody can predict the future.
Ms. MOORE. Representative Foxx, just a follow-up, you are a member, a very senior member, of the Rules Committee, and so I was wondering if the rule is structured in a way that will ever allow to have before us, after we vote on this version, the Adams version of the VAWA bill? Will there be a pathway toward voting on the Senate bill as you understand it?
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I believe the gentlewoman's question is a question for the rule and is not relevant to the point of order which she has raised.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source