By: Alexander Sileo
Despite all of the recent talk about women’s issues in the past month, there has been little discussion on one of the main problems still affecting women in the United States — domestic violence. A Bureau of Justice Statistics report found that three women are murdered each day by their intimate partners. Another study by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention discovered that 30 percent of women and 10 percent of men “experience rape, physical violence, or stalking by a partner with intimate partner violence related impact.” Domestic violence is a dangerous problem in the United States, and with the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) up for reauthorization this year, it is an issue that needs to be brought up more often and discussed openly among politicians and pundits.
Domestic violence, as defined by the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW), is “a pattern of abusive behavior that is used by an intimate partner to gain or maintain power and control over the other intimate partner.” This behavior can take the form of physical, sexual, psychological, or emotional abuse. VAWA was first signed by Bill Clinton in 1994 as a bipartisan effort to stop domestic violence from occurring. Even though women’s rights groups had been around for decades, domestic violence was seen as a private issue that did not warrant outside support from the local community or the federal government. VAWA increased the punishment for domestic violence related crimes and provided funding and support for groups that aided victims of domestic violence. The bill was reauthorized in 2000 and 2005. It is now up for reauthorization in Congress again, but there is a debate over whether or not new provisions should be included, with Democrats and Republicans each supporting different versions of the bill.
Democrats are in favor of a version that expands aid and funds to cover Native Americans, illegal immigrants, and LGBT citizens. Republicans argue that the bill does not contain any measures to confirm that money is being spent efficiently. They also say that the new provisions may “unnecessarily expand immigration avenues by creating new definitions for immigrant victims to claim battery.” Democrats respond by connecting this fight to the overall ‘war on women’ supposedly being fought by Republicans. For Democrats, this is just another way in which the Republican Party is unsympathetic towards women in America. For Republicans, it is another spending project that has gotten too large and too inefficient.
Joan Prittie, the Executive Director of Project Safe, a local non-profit organization that provides support for victims of domestic violence in Athens, says that “the issue has become more visible and known, but not understood.” Project Safe works to ensure the safety of victims through emergency housing, community support groups, a 24 hour hotline, education, and advocacy. One misunderstanding about domestic violence according to Prittie is that “we see domestic violence across the board.” Violence can happen to any person regardless of their gender, race, economic status, sexual orientation, or gender identity.
Prittie agrees that “allowing additional groups to be covered is a good thing” so that more people can have access to increased funding and better services. Native Americans, illegal immigrants and LGBT individuals need to have the support of their federal government just as other groups do in order to stop the spread of domestic violence. Prittie also wishes she had “more ability to determine on a local level what the priority is and tailor services to the community.” Additional funding, which is provided by VAWA and other related laws, is always a good thing, but groups like Project Safe could use more flexibility to determine their own objectives and strategies. Federal funding often comes with strings attached that might make it harder for groups to fully support victims of domestic violence. Even if the lawmakers in Washington have their heart in the right place, they may be inadvertently slowing down the process on a local level. Republicans may have a point about making the law more efficient.
This is the debate the United States should be having. If politicians want to make the 2012 general election about women’s issues, then it should be about an issue that is truly significant. This past week has been filled with debate about Democratic political strategist Hilary Rosen’s comment that Ann Romney has “never worked a day in her life.” Mitt Romney’s campaign is eager to capitalize on the remark and President Barack Obama has already stepped forward in an attempt to stop the situation from snowballing out of control.
This debate over Ann Romney is not an issue. There is no substance. It is politics and not policy. If politicians want to have a fight on women’s issues, then it should be about an issue that affects thousands of Americans. A debate about Ann Romney’s credentials only allows for the two political parties to take uninspiring shots at each other in an attempt to raise funds for their candidates. The debate should be over the reauthorization of VAWA. It should be about whether more groups need support from the law. It should be about whether or not the law requires tweaking so that it is more efficient and effective. Women’s issues are more than off-the-cuff remarks by political strategists. Domestic violence needs to be addressed by those in Washington D.C.
