Collins statement on VAWA

“ . . . instead of good faith collaborations, my colleagues across the aisle have doubled-down on partisan politics at the expense of good policy. They have sought at every turn to make this bill into a political weapon, rather than a critical resource for victims and tools to support law enforcement.” 

WASHINGTON – Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.), ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, made the following opening statement on the House floor. Below are the remarks as prepared: Ranking Member Doug Collins: Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to H.R. 1585, the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act. Mr. Speaker, I support reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act. I believe the intent of this legislation is commendable, and many of the programs it authorizes are critical. This is a bill that should have broad bipartisan support. It’s a bill that should transcend the political games we see too often in Washington, and we should approach it methodically and holistically. Unfortunately, instead of good faith collaborations, my colleagues across the aisle have doubled-down on partisan politics at the expense of good policy. They have sought at every turn to make this bill into a political weapon, rather than a critical resource for victims and tools to support law enforcement. I tried to meet with my Democrat colleagues to negotiate a meaningful reauthorization of VAWA. We tried to engage in bipartisan, bicameral negotiations. Our efforts were rebuffed. And we were handed the flawed bill before us today. My colleagues across the aisle informed us H.R. 1585 would be the bill. This is particularly unfortunate, because this bill is dead on arrival in the Senate. There are areas where both sides can agree — areas where we can strengthen existing law. Instead of seeking out those areas and negotiating in good faith, House Democrats decided a highly partisan bill with zero chance of moving forward in the Senate was the best way to approach reauthorizing crucial VAWA programs. Remember, Republicans tried to add a short-term extension of VAWA to the funding bill in February, when Congresswoman Lesko offered it as the previous question. Democrats blocked this attempt and refused to include a short-term extension to allow time for meaningful negotiations to take place. Mr. Speaker, my colleagues and I want to find a solution that helps victims, prevents domestic violence and strengthens programs that serve vulnerable populations. We stand willing and ready to discuss ways to do that. But I cannot and will not support a bill that undermines and jeopardizes due process; that curtails prosecutorial discretion; that makes it more difficult for victims in rural areas to find housing; that could weaken programs for female victims; that could re-victimize abused women; and that undercuts Second Amendment rights. This bill contains a large expansion of unemployment insurance benefits, which amounts to a new tax on employers. This bill continues to expand the focus of programs past women and children. This bill fails to provide a faith-based exemption for grant recipients, which could jeopardize these organizations’ ability to provide services for victims. Mr. Speaker, this legislation was referred to seven committees. The bill was rushed to a markup at the Judiciary Committee, but at least Judiciary actually held a markup. Even though the rushed Judiciary markup ended in a party line vote, that markup is far more than Democrats gave other committees of jurisdiction. The Ways and Means Committee is the committee with expertise on unemployment insurance benefits. But if you’re on that committee, Democrats denied you the chance to weigh in on that issue at committee, and Americans didn’t get to benefit from your expertise there. The Financial Services Committee is the committee with expertise on housing issues. But if you’re on that committee, you were shut down as well — this bill is moving ahead without the benefit of your consideration. Democrats also denied the Natural Resources, Education and Labor, Veterans Affairs and Energy and Commerce Committees the chance to weigh in on a bill with provisions that sit squarely within their jurisdictions. I want to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act. I want to do it in a way that meets the fundamental goals and intent of the original law, and I want to recognize changes that need to be addressed. Simply put, I want to find bipartisan, bicameral agreement — agreement that Democrats shunned when they rushed this bill to the floor. This bill could actually put women at greater risk, and it’s not a solution I can support.