House Republicans Block Child Marriage Prevention Act
1 réponse
Michael Snyder
WASHINGTON -- On Thursday, the House took up the International
Protecting Girls by Preventing Child Marriage Act of 2010. The bill
would ensure that child marriage is recognized as a human rights
violation, and develop comprehensive strategies to prevent such
marriages around the world. The legislation seemed likely to garner
strong bipartisan support in Congress, and in the Senate, it did. But
last night, the bill was voted down in the House by Republicans who
argued the bill is too costly and could lead to increased abortions --
gripes the measure's supporters say have no basis in reality and are
just excuses to kill the popular bill.
The measure, introduced by Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Olympia
Snowe (R-Maine), passed the Senate by unanimous consent and attracted
a list of 42 cosponsors, including Sens. David Vitter (R-La.) and
Roger Wicker (R-Miss.). It also had the support of nonpartisan groups
like the YWCA. On Dec. 6, former president of Ireland Mary Robinson
and Nobel Peace Prize winner Desmond Tutu wrote an op-ed in The
Washington Post, praising the United States for stepping up: "This act
illustrates how support for securing a just and healthy life for every
woman and girl transcends politics."
The House version, introduced by Reps. Betty McCollum (D-Minn.) and
Ander Crenshaw (R-Fla.), had 112 cosponsors. What's interesting is
that some of them -- such as Rep. Lee Terry (R-Neb.) -- actually voted
against the bill. In the end, only 12 Republicans backed the measure;
nine Democrats defected to the GOP side. So what happened?
This week, a GOP whip alert went out about the child marriage
legislation, saying that House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio),
Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) and Committee on Foreign Affairs Ranking
Member Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) all oppose it. The email:
S. 987 authorizes $108 million over 5 years without sufficient
oversight of the taxpayers' money. According to the Congressional
Research Service, there is no available, confirmed figure on how much
taxpayer funding is already being used to fight child marriage in
developing countries and this bill does not address that issue.
In contrast, Ranking Member Ros-Lehtinen has introduced H.R. 6521,
which would result in no more than $1 million in potential costs,
while making it clear that child marriage is a violation of human
rights and that its prevention should be a goal of US foreign policy;
requiring the creation of a multi-year strategy; requiring a
comprehensive assessment of what the United States is already doing
and funding in the effort to fight child marriage; and requiring that
the practice of child marriage in other countries be reported each
year as part of the annual Human Rights Report.
There are also concerns that funding will be directed to NGOs that
promote and perform abortion and efforts to combat child marriage
could be usurped as a way to overturn pro-life laws.
The prevalence of child marriage remains alarmingly high worldwide. As
CARE, a leading humanitarian organization fighting global poverty and
supporting the child marriage prevention bill notes, "More than 60
million girls ages 17 and younger -- many as young as 10 -- are forced
into marriage in developing countries. Many of these girls are married
to men more than twice their age. Not only does this unacceptable
practice thwart a girl's education, it endangers her health and often
locks her into a life of poverty."
Story continues below
Advertisement
On Thursday, Durbin's office put out a statement sharply criticizing
the House's failure to pass the bill: "The action on the House floor
stopping the Child Marriage bill tonight will endanger the lives of
millions of women and girls around the world. These young girls,
enslaved in marriage, will be brutalized and many will die when their
young bodies are torn apart while giving birth. Those who voted to
continue this barbaric practice brought shame to Capitol Hill.
GOP concerns over abortion and the cost of the bill are puzzling.
According to a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimate, "CBO
estimates that implementing the bill would cost $67 million over the
2011-2015 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts.
Enacting S. 987 would not affect direct spending or revenues;
therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply to this legislation."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/17/house-republicans-block-child-marriage-prevention-act_n_798382.html
Cette action est irreversible, confirmez la suppression du commentaire ?
Signaler le commentaire
Veuillez sélectionner un problème
Nudité
Violence
Harcèlement
Fraude
Vente illégale
Discours haineux
Terrorisme
Autre
droolingidiot
Michael Snyder wrote:
WASHINGTON -- On Thursday, the House took up the International Protecting Girls by Preventing Child Marriage Act of 2010. The bill would ensure that child marriage is recognized as a human rights violation, and develop comprehensive strategies to prevent such marriages around the world. The legislation seemed likely to garner strong bipartisan support in Congress, and in the Senate, it did. But last night, the bill was voted down in the House by Republicans who argued the bill is too costly and could lead to increased abortions -- gripes the measure's supporters say have no basis in reality and are just excuses to kill the popular bill.
The measure, introduced by Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), passed the Senate by unanimous consent and attracted a list of 42 cosponsors, including Sens. David Vitter (R-La.) and Roger Wicker (R-Miss.). It also had the support of nonpartisan groups like the YWCA. On Dec. 6, former president of Ireland Mary Robinson and Nobel Peace Prize winner Desmond Tutu wrote an op-ed in The Washington Post, praising the United States for stepping up: "This act illustrates how support for securing a just and healthy life for every woman and girl transcends politics."
The House version, introduced by Reps. Betty McCollum (D-Minn.) and Ander Crenshaw (R-Fla.), had 112 cosponsors. What's interesting is that some of them -- such as Rep. Lee Terry (R-Neb.) -- actually voted against the bill. In the end, only 12 Republicans backed the measure; nine Democrats defected to the GOP side. So what happened?
This week, a GOP whip alert went out about the child marriage legislation, saying that House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio), Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) and Committee on Foreign Affairs Ranking Member Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) all oppose it. The email:
S. 987 authorizes $108 million over 5 years without sufficient oversight of the taxpayers' money. According to the Congressional Research Service, there is no available, confirmed figure on how much taxpayer funding is already being used to fight child marriage in developing countries and this bill does not address that issue.
In contrast, Ranking Member Ros-Lehtinen has introduced H.R. 6521, which would result in no more than $1 million in potential costs, while making it clear that child marriage is a violation of human rights and that its prevention should be a goal of US foreign policy; requiring the creation of a multi-year strategy; requiring a comprehensive assessment of what the United States is already doing and funding in the effort to fight child marriage; and requiring that the practice of child marriage in other countries be reported each year as part of the annual Human Rights Report.
There are also concerns that funding will be directed to NGOs that promote and perform abortion and efforts to combat child marriage could be usurped as a way to overturn pro-life laws.
The prevalence of child marriage remains alarmingly high worldwide. As CARE, a leading humanitarian organization fighting global poverty and supporting the child marriage prevention bill notes, "More than 60 million girls ages 17 and younger -- many as young as 10 -- are forced into marriage in developing countries. Many of these girls are married to men more than twice their age. Not only does this unacceptable practice thwart a girl's education, it endangers her health and often locks her into a life of poverty." Story continues below Advertisement
On Thursday, Durbin's office put out a statement sharply criticizing the House's failure to pass the bill: "The action on the House floor stopping the Child Marriage bill tonight will endanger the lives of millions of women and girls around the world. These young girls, enslaved in marriage, will be brutalized and many will die when their young bodies are torn apart while giving birth. Those who voted to continue this barbaric practice brought shame to Capitol Hill.
GOP concerns over abortion and the cost of the bill are puzzling. According to a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimate, "CBO estimates that implementing the bill would cost $67 million over the 2011-2015 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts. Enacting S. 987 would not affect direct spending or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply to this legislation." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/17/house-republicans-block-child-ma rriage-prevention-act_n_798382.html
This isn't surprising. If anyone is going to be pro child exploitation it is most certainly going to be Repulican politicians. Once they are in the majority we can all expect a "Republicans Can Fuck Little Boy Ass" bill to hit the floor in a matter of days. Throw in a little meth smoking and you will certainly have universal Republic support!
Michael Snyder <msnyder@sonic.net> wrote:
WASHINGTON -- On Thursday, the House took up the International
Protecting Girls by Preventing Child Marriage Act of 2010. The bill
would ensure that child marriage is recognized as a human rights
violation, and develop comprehensive strategies to prevent such
marriages around the world. The legislation seemed likely to garner
strong bipartisan support in Congress, and in the Senate, it did. But
last night, the bill was voted down in the House by Republicans who
argued the bill is too costly and could lead to increased abortions --
gripes the measure's supporters say have no basis in reality and are
just excuses to kill the popular bill.
The measure, introduced by Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Olympia
Snowe (R-Maine), passed the Senate by unanimous consent and attracted
a list of 42 cosponsors, including Sens. David Vitter (R-La.) and
Roger Wicker (R-Miss.). It also had the support of nonpartisan groups
like the YWCA. On Dec. 6, former president of Ireland Mary Robinson
and Nobel Peace Prize winner Desmond Tutu wrote an op-ed in The
Washington Post, praising the United States for stepping up: "This act
illustrates how support for securing a just and healthy life for every
woman and girl transcends politics."
The House version, introduced by Reps. Betty McCollum (D-Minn.) and
Ander Crenshaw (R-Fla.), had 112 cosponsors. What's interesting is
that some of them -- such as Rep. Lee Terry (R-Neb.) -- actually voted
against the bill. In the end, only 12 Republicans backed the measure;
nine Democrats defected to the GOP side. So what happened?
This week, a GOP whip alert went out about the child marriage
legislation, saying that House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio),
Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) and Committee on Foreign Affairs Ranking
Member Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) all oppose it. The email:
S. 987 authorizes $108 million over 5 years without sufficient
oversight of the taxpayers' money. According to the Congressional
Research Service, there is no available, confirmed figure on how much
taxpayer funding is already being used to fight child marriage in
developing countries and this bill does not address that issue.
In contrast, Ranking Member Ros-Lehtinen has introduced H.R. 6521,
which would result in no more than $1 million in potential costs,
while making it clear that child marriage is a violation of human
rights and that its prevention should be a goal of US foreign policy;
requiring the creation of a multi-year strategy; requiring a
comprehensive assessment of what the United States is already doing
and funding in the effort to fight child marriage; and requiring that
the practice of child marriage in other countries be reported each
year as part of the annual Human Rights Report.
There are also concerns that funding will be directed to NGOs that
promote and perform abortion and efforts to combat child marriage
could be usurped as a way to overturn pro-life laws.
The prevalence of child marriage remains alarmingly high worldwide. As
CARE, a leading humanitarian organization fighting global poverty and
supporting the child marriage prevention bill notes, "More than 60
million girls ages 17 and younger -- many as young as 10 -- are forced
into marriage in developing countries. Many of these girls are married
to men more than twice their age. Not only does this unacceptable
practice thwart a girl's education, it endangers her health and often
locks her into a life of poverty."
Story continues below
Advertisement
On Thursday, Durbin's office put out a statement sharply criticizing
the House's failure to pass the bill: "The action on the House floor
stopping the Child Marriage bill tonight will endanger the lives of
millions of women and girls around the world. These young girls,
enslaved in marriage, will be brutalized and many will die when their
young bodies are torn apart while giving birth. Those who voted to
continue this barbaric practice brought shame to Capitol Hill.
GOP concerns over abortion and the cost of the bill are puzzling.
According to a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimate, "CBO
estimates that implementing the bill would cost $67 million over the
2011-2015 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts.
Enacting S. 987 would not affect direct spending or revenues;
therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply to this legislation."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/17/house-republicans-block-child-ma
rriage-prevention-act_n_798382.html
This isn't surprising. If anyone is going to be pro child exploitation it
is most certainly going to be Repulican politicians. Once they are in the
majority we can all expect a "Republicans Can Fuck Little Boy Ass" bill to
hit the floor in a matter of days. Throw in a little meth smoking and you
will certainly have universal Republic support!
WASHINGTON -- On Thursday, the House took up the International Protecting Girls by Preventing Child Marriage Act of 2010. The bill would ensure that child marriage is recognized as a human rights violation, and develop comprehensive strategies to prevent such marriages around the world. The legislation seemed likely to garner strong bipartisan support in Congress, and in the Senate, it did. But last night, the bill was voted down in the House by Republicans who argued the bill is too costly and could lead to increased abortions -- gripes the measure's supporters say have no basis in reality and are just excuses to kill the popular bill.
The measure, introduced by Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), passed the Senate by unanimous consent and attracted a list of 42 cosponsors, including Sens. David Vitter (R-La.) and Roger Wicker (R-Miss.). It also had the support of nonpartisan groups like the YWCA. On Dec. 6, former president of Ireland Mary Robinson and Nobel Peace Prize winner Desmond Tutu wrote an op-ed in The Washington Post, praising the United States for stepping up: "This act illustrates how support for securing a just and healthy life for every woman and girl transcends politics."
The House version, introduced by Reps. Betty McCollum (D-Minn.) and Ander Crenshaw (R-Fla.), had 112 cosponsors. What's interesting is that some of them -- such as Rep. Lee Terry (R-Neb.) -- actually voted against the bill. In the end, only 12 Republicans backed the measure; nine Democrats defected to the GOP side. So what happened?
This week, a GOP whip alert went out about the child marriage legislation, saying that House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio), Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) and Committee on Foreign Affairs Ranking Member Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) all oppose it. The email:
S. 987 authorizes $108 million over 5 years without sufficient oversight of the taxpayers' money. According to the Congressional Research Service, there is no available, confirmed figure on how much taxpayer funding is already being used to fight child marriage in developing countries and this bill does not address that issue.
In contrast, Ranking Member Ros-Lehtinen has introduced H.R. 6521, which would result in no more than $1 million in potential costs, while making it clear that child marriage is a violation of human rights and that its prevention should be a goal of US foreign policy; requiring the creation of a multi-year strategy; requiring a comprehensive assessment of what the United States is already doing and funding in the effort to fight child marriage; and requiring that the practice of child marriage in other countries be reported each year as part of the annual Human Rights Report.
There are also concerns that funding will be directed to NGOs that promote and perform abortion and efforts to combat child marriage could be usurped as a way to overturn pro-life laws.
The prevalence of child marriage remains alarmingly high worldwide. As CARE, a leading humanitarian organization fighting global poverty and supporting the child marriage prevention bill notes, "More than 60 million girls ages 17 and younger -- many as young as 10 -- are forced into marriage in developing countries. Many of these girls are married to men more than twice their age. Not only does this unacceptable practice thwart a girl's education, it endangers her health and often locks her into a life of poverty." Story continues below Advertisement
On Thursday, Durbin's office put out a statement sharply criticizing the House's failure to pass the bill: "The action on the House floor stopping the Child Marriage bill tonight will endanger the lives of millions of women and girls around the world. These young girls, enslaved in marriage, will be brutalized and many will die when their young bodies are torn apart while giving birth. Those who voted to continue this barbaric practice brought shame to Capitol Hill.
GOP concerns over abortion and the cost of the bill are puzzling. According to a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimate, "CBO estimates that implementing the bill would cost $67 million over the 2011-2015 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts. Enacting S. 987 would not affect direct spending or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply to this legislation." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/17/house-republicans-block-child-ma rriage-prevention-act_n_798382.html
This isn't surprising. If anyone is going to be pro child exploitation it is most certainly going to be Repulican politicians. Once they are in the majority we can all expect a "Republicans Can Fuck Little Boy Ass" bill to hit the floor in a matter of days. Throw in a little meth smoking and you will certainly have universal Republic support!
