Sexual Predators get all the breaks
The House of Representatives recently passed a bill called the "Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act." The act basically is a pro-life law that would impose federal penalties on anyone who transported a minor across state lines to avoid a state's parental notification law. Let me draw a graphic example to illustrate. Suppose a 16-year-old girl is being raped by her father. Mom doesn't know it's going on. Daughter gets pregnant and wants an abortion. Her home state requires her or her doctor to notify her parents before she gets an abortion. She is afraid of destroying her family and doesn't want to tell mom and dad. She also doesn't want to have to delay by going through a judicial proceeding to get court approval. So she asks her cousin to take her to the next state where there isn't a notification law. The house bill would make the cousin a federal criminal.
House Democrats, knowing they were going to lose if they tried to defeat passage, sought to make the bill a little more reasonable by carving out some exceptions for grandparents, aunts, uncles, clergy, cousins, or god-parents. Democrats introduced this amendment in committee, where it was defeated on a party-line vote. The Congressional record reads something like this: "An amendment was offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee to exclude grandparents from the prohibitions of this bill. The amendment was defeated by an 8-16 rollcall vote." So far, nothing is all that out of the ordinary.
The fun started when the summary of the committee's activity was prepared and distributed to the full house. The summary prepared by the judiciary committee read as follows: "Ms. Jackson-Lee offered an amendment that would have exempted sexual predators from prosecution under the bill if they were clergy, godparents, aunts, uncles, or first cousins of a minor, and would require a study by the Government Accounting Office. By a roll call vote of 13 yeas to 20 nays, the amendment was defeated."
An exemption for grandparents and aunts and uncles is reported as an exemption for sexual predators! The Republican chair of the judiciary committee, James Sensenbrenner defended the committee's actions. The Republicans said the summary was appropriate because it was accurate.
This is the tone of political debate in our nation's highest chambers. The Republicans won. The Democrats lost. The amendment tempering the harsh effects of the Republican bill was defeated. But even in victory, the Republicans chose to mischaracterize the amendment as being an exemption for sexual predators.
Makes you sick doesn't it?
I suggest that from now on, every exemption in every law be listed as exempting sexual predators unless they are specifically excluded. Social Security payroll taxes, for example, don't apply to income above $90,000 a year. So let's say, "Sexual predators are exempted from paying Social Security taxes if they are rich enough."
Or, generally employers have to pay all employees overtime, but there are white-collar exemptions, like for doctors and lawyers. So let's say, "Hospitals don't have to pay overtime wages to sexual predator doctors."
Or how about, this one, it is generally considered defamation if you lie about someone else and injure that person's reputation - but there is an exemption for members of congress speaking on the house or senate floor. So let's say "Sexual predators in congress are free to lie about anyone they want to without fear or punishment!"
House Democrats, knowing they were going to lose if they tried to defeat passage, sought to make the bill a little more reasonable by carving out some exceptions for grandparents, aunts, uncles, clergy, cousins, or god-parents. Democrats introduced this amendment in committee, where it was defeated on a party-line vote. The Congressional record reads something like this: "An amendment was offered by Ms. Jackson-Lee to exclude grandparents from the prohibitions of this bill. The amendment was defeated by an 8-16 rollcall vote." So far, nothing is all that out of the ordinary.
The fun started when the summary of the committee's activity was prepared and distributed to the full house. The summary prepared by the judiciary committee read as follows: "Ms. Jackson-Lee offered an amendment that would have exempted sexual predators from prosecution under the bill if they were clergy, godparents, aunts, uncles, or first cousins of a minor, and would require a study by the Government Accounting Office. By a roll call vote of 13 yeas to 20 nays, the amendment was defeated."
An exemption for grandparents and aunts and uncles is reported as an exemption for sexual predators! The Republican chair of the judiciary committee, James Sensenbrenner defended the committee's actions. The Republicans said the summary was appropriate because it was accurate.
This is the tone of political debate in our nation's highest chambers. The Republicans won. The Democrats lost. The amendment tempering the harsh effects of the Republican bill was defeated. But even in victory, the Republicans chose to mischaracterize the amendment as being an exemption for sexual predators.
Makes you sick doesn't it?
I suggest that from now on, every exemption in every law be listed as exempting sexual predators unless they are specifically excluded. Social Security payroll taxes, for example, don't apply to income above $90,000 a year. So let's say, "Sexual predators are exempted from paying Social Security taxes if they are rich enough."
Or, generally employers have to pay all employees overtime, but there are white-collar exemptions, like for doctors and lawyers. So let's say, "Hospitals don't have to pay overtime wages to sexual predator doctors."
Or how about, this one, it is generally considered defamation if you lie about someone else and injure that person's reputation - but there is an exemption for members of congress speaking on the house or senate floor. So let's say "Sexual predators in congress are free to lie about anyone they want to without fear or punishment!"
posted by Charles S. Russell at 10:39 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home