Washington Steps Back From Policing Indian Lands, Even as Crime Rises
The original article I saw also mentioned that the reason many cases weren't prosecuted is because suspects left the reservation and a problem with evidence gathering.The federal government has cut the size of its police force in Indian country, reduced financing for law enforcement and begun fewer investigations of violent felony crime, even as rates of murder and rape there have increased to more than 20 times the national average, according to data.
<snip>The Bureau of Indian Affairs, for instance, which along with the Justice Department is responsible for law enforcement for 1.6 million residents spread over 56 million acres of Indian country, distributed $322 million to tribal law enforcement programs in 2012, according to budget outlays.
But both Philadelphia, which has a population of 1.5 million and a police budget of $552 million, and Phoenix, with 1.4 million people and a $540 million police budget, spend far more on public safety despite having smaller populations and less area to patrol. (Phoenix employs 3,100 officers, while Philadelphia has about 6,400 officers.)
Not sure how they thought opposing this was a winner.After nearly a year of resistance that has damaged them politically with women voters, House Republicans have found a clever way to back down on the reauthorization of an expanded Violence Against Women Act, aides confirmed to TPM late Tuesday.
The original plan was for the Republican majority in the House to pass its version of the Violence Against Women Act reauthorization and then go to conference conference committee with the Senate. The Senate has already overwhelmingly passed a more aggressive bill, with protections for LGBT, Native American and undocumented women that have been at the heart of the dispute with House Republicans.
But all that changed Tuesday night. The Rules Committee instead sent the House GOP’s version of the Violence Against Women Act to the floor with a key caveat: if that legislation fails, then the Senate-passed version will get an up-or-down vote.
How do you vote against something called "Violence Against Women Act" and then expect women to vote for you ???
Whether they are here legally or not whether they live on a reservation our not violence against women should not be tolerated anywhere in the US.
What's your point? I mean, even a blind kool-aid drinker like yourself couldn't possibly defend the GOP on this one.Originally Posted by CajunRaven
Again, it's amazing that the Republicans fought so hard against this. Sometimes I'm ashamed of my party.After nearly a year of partisan infighting on Capitol Hill, the House of Representatives and the Senate have finally agreed to send a reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act to President Obama’s desk.
On Thursday, by a vote of 286 to 138, the House passed the bipartisan Senate-approved version of the bill — one that includes added protections for LGBT, Native American, and undocumented victims of domestic violence. All 138 votes against the bill were Republicans.
A watered down Republican version of the bill, which was offered as a substitute amendment, failed to garner enough votes to slow the process. It was struck down by a vote of 257 to 166. Sixty Republicans voted against their own party’s replacement measure.
I don't have time to read the proposed act but could any one here who supports the act please explain what new protections a woman would receive under this new law? Also please explain why these new protections should not be afforded to all citizens? not just women?
I'm being serious
Show me where I constantly defend the GOP, please. I'll bet I can find as many where I criticize them. LMAO. You on OTOH. Do you have a tatt of Donkey on your shoulder.
My God. You're too much.
So its been 5 hrs now and no one answered my question. Speaks volumes.
Right Upset Violence Against Women Act will stop them from threatening their wives, gays, minoritiesIThat explains everything rather neatly, doesn't it?am not making these comments up. My favorite is the fear of the Federal govt sending a “minority woman” to your door to talk to you (comment #27). Which also proves one of my thesis that the reason the right wing hates govt related jobs like in Amtrak or the Postal Service is that they tend to employ minorities. What right wing hatred of women, gays, people of color (aka Minorities) and so on?????
Like most of the right wing’s ideological actions at the root of all their animosity to ‘federal govt”, big govt” etc has to do with them being against laws that deprive them of the ability to act out their racism, sexism and white entitlement they assume is their birthright, Everything else, all theories on limited govt economics etc is window dressing to hide their bigotry.
|Terms of Service | Search/Archive | Feedback | Contact Information | DC50tv |
Baltimore Sun | Chicago Tribune | Daily Press | Hartford Courant | LA Times | Orlando Sentinel | Sun Sentinel
The Morning Call | The Virginia Gazette
Baltimore Sun, 501 N. Calvert Street, P.O. Box 1377, Baltimore, MD 21278