Violence Against Women Act Summary

1798 Words4 Pages

Summary:
The Violence Against Women Act of 2013 set forth to reauthorize the The Violence Against Women Act of 1994, which expired in late 2011. After failing an initial attempt at reauthorization in the 112th Congress due to disagreements among the two parties on key provisions in the new bill. These disagreements centered groups mentioned like the LGBT community, illegal immigrants, and American Indian groups.
A new version of the VAWA was considered and adopted during the first session of the 113th Congress. Since 1994, the Act has provided funds to state and local governments to improve the criminal justice response to domestic/dating violence, assault, and stalking. The reauthorization was expanded to provide protections for groups like …show more content…

While the House was controlled by Republicans and the Senate by Democrats, the chambers received an 83% disapproval rating. During the 113th Congress, Barack Obama was in his fifth and sixth year of his presidency. Although, not a key part of the President Obama’s agenda, he signed the Violence Against Women Act of 2013 into law just months after the startup of the new Congress
The Violence Against Women Act was originally debated in Congress and passed into law in 1994. As a part of a much larger omnibus crime bill, HR 3355 known as the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, was written by Senator and former Vice President Joe Biden (D-DE). The act was created to provide funding for law enforcement responses to acts of violence against women. The funds, approximately 1.6 billion dollars, went to form specialized units to investigate crimes and aid in the prosecution of the crimes. The act also provides for the training of law enforcement and health care …show more content…

In response to Ellmers statement, Representative Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) said, “It is time to reject this cynical ploy and pass the Senate’s bipartisan Violence Against Women Act reauthorization now without amendment,” (Congressional Record, 113th Congress, February 28, 2013, 801). Democrats went on to criticize the GOP amendment for “cherry-picking” classification of people to extend protection to, as well as deeming the legislation “inhumane”(Congressional Record, 113th Congress, February 28, 2013, 801). Democrat leaders believed that without addressing these groups of individuals, it would work to take away protections from them, and give the public the perception that violence against them was

Open Document