I'm amazed how this reconciliation process doesn't work
|
I'm amazed how this reconciliation process doesn't work
Not hard to understand when you know the specifics . First ;theoretically violence against anyone is a crime. But OK they made special provisions for crimes against women in 1994 by a bi-partisan Congress ;and Clintoon signing.
So what happens this time when it comes up for reauthorization ? Well the House passes the bill like it was . But the Dem Senate suddenly decides that the violence against women law should now extend to lesbians ,gays ,transgenders ,transformers ,and illegal aliens .
When 2 different versions of the same bill gets passed by both Houses of Congress then there needs to be a conference committee to iron out the differences . There is where the bill stalled . So who's at fault . The House that passed the bill as it had always been ;or the Senate that unilaterally changed the bill ?
What I mean is this Tom we have a mechanism for resolving empasses, it's called a double dissolution. When one party blocks legislation the government can use it as an excuse to dissolve both houses and force an election. Even relatively minor matters can provide this excuse. The threat means that there has to be negotiation in good faith in most matters and only a few thorny issues remain which will only force a dissolution if the government thinks it can win the election. No solution and the bills ultimately lapse.
The question isn't who is at fault, the two houses exist so that there is even handedness in legislation, it is part of the democratic process that legislation gets reviewed and modified. I know that sometimes undesirable changes are made for political purposes particularly when you have the situation you do where the party controlling the House is essentually the opposition to the governing party typified by the President. It is all part of the cut and thrust of politics
Lets see 1994, now we are in 2012, its time to modernize because we have more diverse people to protect. I can go with the process, and see what happens but adding gays and trans genders is no big deal, is it? How does that slow the process down?
Why do you need separate legislation when violence against anyone is a crime... no ? It is essentially the same problem I have with so called 'hate' crime. Violence against anyone is illegal.
House Passes Violence Against Women Act That Leaves Out LGBT, Immigrant Protections
They passed a watered down version that excludes gay and immigrants. Just like everyone thought they would.
Quote:
During the House debate, Democrats charged that the GOP bill would actually leave victims of domestic violence worse off than they are under current law. Unlike the Senate bill, the House proposal discourages undocumented immigrant women from reporting abuse without the threat of being deported. It also makes it harder for Native American women to seek justice against their abusers, and it leaves out protections for the LGBT community altogether.
Republicans "rarely miss an opportunity to exclude LGBT Americans from important rights and benefits," Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.) said. "They're saying if you're a woman in a relationship with another woman, then you don't deserve the same protections from domestic abuse or sexual assault."
Given that Obama pays his women staffers 18% less than his male staffers; I'm surprised none have brought him up on Bedwetter charges. This was also true of his campaign staff. Female employees were earning an average of $6,872,compared with an average of $7,235 for male employees. That is a difference of 5.3 percent or $2,100 per year.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Now we know that Valerie Jarrett is a top advisor to the President ;but a recent photo of him from a White House Flickr account shows him surrounded by his "top advisors" ,an all male cast .Where is Jarrett ?
P122912PS-0422 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Seems like his only female advisor of note recently was Sandra Fluke.
The women had gone off to the ladies room.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
One picture is hardly evidence of anything and I would need job description to verify he indeed is paying woman less for the same job, so lets not assume unless you have those facts and for sure NO lawsuits have been filed or complants from the females involved.
None of that has anything to do with what the right has done and the laws they have written and passed or the election results we have just witnessed.
The information was obtained through the White House own web page . You can do the calculations yourself or trust that the information ;available at many cites ,is accurate .
Female employees earned a median annual salary of $60,000... Male employees $71,000.
2011 Annual Report to Congress on White House Staff | The White House
Look at the caption again... "In the Oval Office, the President meets with senior advisors to discuss the ongoing fiscal cliff negotiations."Quote:
One picture is hardly evidence of anything
Where are the female "senior advisors " ?
Tal aren't you a couple of centuries out there?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
It's silliness . You could write up hundreds of pieces of legislation identifying which special group deserves protection against violence. Or you can have one law that says violence against anyone is illegal.
Yes Tom violence is illegal and the instruments of violence should be illegal too
Most violence... especially domestic violence, is done with blunt instruments knives and bare hands . Good luck making them illegal.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
White House salaries, 2011 - Spreadsheets - Los Angeles Times
What do republicans have against lgbt, and immigrants?
Nothing ;why do you think they deserve special treatment under the law ? Isn't that against the 14th amendment ? Doesn't laws against violence already cover equal treatment under the law ?
That's the point, they have not gotten the equal protection under the law they seek. That's why they holler. Because you don't listen to their needs, and don't know what they are, then how can you dismiss it so easily?
What's the skin off your nose to include them? Don't tell me they don't need it because you don't know that.
Can you show me where is says in any law that violence is a crime except against these people...Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Honestly I can't seem to find it anywhere Or is this the tired old argument that everyone should be a special class except those deemed by a political party? What part of illegal is beyond your understanding?
.
One of the obstacles for lgbt, immigrants, and native Americans is in the low priority there cases are prosecuted and like rape victims the difficulty in even bringing a case against the perpetrators because of jurisdictional conflict in local courts and low evidence because of resources.
That's why even domestic violence cases have been difficult to bring forth and usually after repeated incidence of a clear paper trail do these actually even get to a court, so there are groups that have no avenues to get away from the perpetraor, orthe resources toeve be treated for their being a victim,especially in te Indian naion who have been hollering for years at not having jurisdiction to even serve a warrant to perpertrators outside their own land.
Illegals have the added obstacle of fear and intimidation because they have no recourse in courts as they have no standing just being illegal. They are victimized with no fear of retaliations ever. Often by the ones who employ them in the first place.
Including them in the new bill would raise them as a priority of the court and allow prosecutors and the victims the resources to actually get these cases through the courts and eliminate the ease they are exploited and victimized. It also resources the processing of evidence like rape kits and adds them to a national data base and sadly even domestic cases by citizens already is way behind in getting DNA and other evidence that can only be done in a lab.
Making domestic violence a higher priority should be a national focus and all should be included. So its not about special laws for special groups, its about raising the level of awareness and resources for groups that have had the least access and resources to get the equal protection under the law that's guaranteed us.
You know as well as I do where no money is earmarked specifically, there will be NO action. That's what the original VAWA was supposed to address, and expanssion is needed at this time to prevent some who are falling through the cracks by the millions. Heck it's the same money but stretched farther.
Advocates stunned Violence Against Women Act allowed to expire | News - Home
Maybe this will shed some light of what local advocates around the country actually are faced with.
All I know is all this effort by the left to bring us together by separating everyone by special interest group is counterproductive.
By the way, I'm glad all those Sandra Flukes are thrilled with getting free birth control, even though their paycheck is smaller and it's not so free for others.
While at the same time your right wing special interest groups are pushing your own agenda too, like banning abortions by making special rules on the clinics and doctors and forcing people to read the bible and counselled how wrong they are.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
While abortions are legal. For sure your way isn't bring us together either. Now what?
No one is forcing anybody to read the bible, but I'll take being a defender of the most innocent human life any day over defending the right to kill babies.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Seem you should be with me on educating and showing all women the proper use of contracepion and make it as easy to get as possible since I think that's one of the best ways to prevent abortions no matter when you believe a baby, is a baby.
State Trends for 2011 on Abortion, Family Planning, Sex Education and Insurance
RCRC - "I'm a Fan of Birth Control"
I guess you missed one of the 29 times I said access to birth control was not an issue, in fact use among American women was almost universal according to the CDC. But now thanks to your president poor women with no insurance are paying more as of Jan. 1.
I disagree as access is the issue along with knowledge and education. There are obstacles to all these things being workable and efficient as a whole.
As far as the tax holiday for us middle class voters being over with. I am sad too. But this isn't my first time adjusting my budget because of government changes.
Still reading upon those religious groups peddling misinformation and masquerading as government funded independent abortion counselors though.
Wrong Bucko, I posted the link more than once where the CDC said access was NOT an issue which is why I keep calling the mandate a disease in search of a cure. It is an issue now for women with no insurance because the price just escalated.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
You're looking for the exception, not the rule and women go there or not of their own free will. It's called CHOICE.Quote:
Still reading upon those religious groups peddling misinformation and masquerading as government funded independent abortion counselors though.
I will pass over the BUCKO inference and point out that the CDC's position is there are many forms of contraceptives available but if you don't have a doctor or the insurance to see one then you have hardly any accesss to them and without insurance the price may not be affordable. That's what the mandate is about, having access.
I can go with choice but it also has to be acurate information to make an informed decision and not some activist saying its against god rules.
http://www.dovechristiancounseling.com/Abortion.html
This isn't an exception, it's the religious right wing. They should go to Planned Parenthood of their own free will to. Their CHOICE.Quote:
It is obvious from the above scriptures that God abhors abortion and considers it to be MURDER. And the liberal media and politicians and feminists who try to tell you otherwise are ignoring what God says about it. Not only that, those who help a woman get an abortion will pay for it in the next life.
THOU SHALT NOT MURDER is VERY CLEAR. And if you murder an innocent child you will end up in hell. So if you are trying to decide whether to abort your baby or not, the clear answer is NO. Save not only your babies life, but your life as well. For when you kill your child you also eternally kill yourself. The choice is yours. If you do not believe in God or the Bible and think you can kill another human being with no consequences you will find out you are wrong.
Not only that, but women who have already had abortions become very depressed and even suicidal years later. Many of them end up in counselors offices unable to live with their sin. It affects them the rest of their lives.
There are too many loving adults who cannot have children who would love to adopt your baby. Even if you were raped, DO NOT MURDER the baby inside you as it is entirely innocent. Have the baby and put it up for adoption. So you do have an alternative.
If you have already had an abortion then you can confess that as a sin before God and ask God to forgive you of the sin of abortion. If you do this, and are sincere, He will forgive you and you will not end up in hell when you die.
What part of “Contraceptive use in the United States is virtually universal among women of reproductive age" do you not understand?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Gee, Obama mandates "free" contraceptives and his buddies in the pharmacy industry wouldn't raise the price on a guaranteed sale?Quote:
Why did the price escalate?
P.S. I'm sure that had at least a small part in insurance rates going up by double digits. Obama bent the cost curve all right, sharply upward.
The flaw in your logic is male condoms are included in that universal tag, as are other methods of birth control, like the withdrawal method and sterilization. Oral contraceptive require a doctor visit prescription and insurance, costly to poor people, but you tie the president to rising costs? Now that's a joke since you are fine with rich guys having the right to get rich as they see fit.
Costs for health care has been rising unchecked for 20 years before Obama showed up my friend. Pull out some old pay stubs if you don't believe me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
The flawed logic is you don't comprehend the words "among women."
Women are to provide condoms at encounters?Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Do you read your own links, condoms are mention through out. Page 4 [ Series 23, No. 29Quote:
Contraceptive method
Female sterilization...
Male sterilization...
All methods other than sterilization...
Injectable...
Pill...
Male condom............................
Withdrawal...
Periodic abstinence...
Spermicides...
What part of any of that changes the meaning of "Contraceptive use in the United States is virtually universal among women of reproductive age"? Nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
I think tom asked this the other day, but when will Obama end his war on women?
Personally I think the NAACP, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson should be outraged as well, the racism in nominating three white guys in a row is obvious.Quote:
Obama’s failure to nominate women for two top Cabinet posts questioned
President Obama brought his top Pentagon and Central Intelligence Agency chiefs together Monday with their potential replacements, and some critics noticed one thing that stood out: Each of them was a white man.
What part of poor people use rubbers because they can't afford pills, doctors, or insurance is it you don't get?Quote:
What part of any of that changes the meaning of "Contraceptive use in the United States is virtually universal among women of reproductive age"? Nothing.
The race card? Or a white guy telling 4 black guys what they should think, or do?Quote:
Personally I think the NAACP, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson should be outraged as well, the racism in nominating three white guys in a row is obvious.
[QUOTE=talaniman;3364318]Some people don't like to take pills, but you have yet to offer any wisdom that invalidates the meaning of "Contraceptive use in the United States is virtually universal among women of reproductive age." The mandate was a cure in search of a disease.Quote:
What part of poor people use rubbers because they can't afford pills, doctors, or insurance is it you don't get?
Come on Tal, try to stick with the facts. I know it's difficult to acknowledge that Obama pays his increasing number of white male buddies better than his wimmen.Quote:
The race card? Or a white guy telling 4 black guys what they should think, or do?
Heck ;even the Compost notices .
Obama’s Cabinet diversity in danger with new picks - In the Loop - The Washington Post
LOL, you really are stubborn, or stuck, I don't know which, but you dispute your own facts in the link YOU provided that includes condoms,and spermacides and that's what makes contraceptives universally available.
I gave you a link to the job descriptions and titles as well as the pay, and they were well within equal work for equal pay standards so your race baiting is plain silly.
Also from your link...Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Quote:
Of course, there’s still time for the picture to change. There’s only been one official nomination and the game of second-term musical chairs is barely underway.
Yeah of course the Compost was giving it the best spin. But there is no reason to assume he won't go into his 2nd term with an all white male cadre of advisors.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:50 PM. |