What would you say if you were told that you pay for a service that most likely you can’t be allowed to use? *
…if you knew the providers of that service also use your money to charge you (if you are a man) with crimes you never committed?
…if you knew those who are allowed to use this service find that it doesn’t help them, either?
…if you knew that this service hasn’t done anything to improve its function in 30 years?
…if you knew that this service is staffed by people who are unqualified for any other job, and incompetent at the one they have?
…if you knew that these people despise their clients, and openly denigrate them in public?
…if you knew that this service had no accountability to the taxpayer for its success or failure?
…if you knew that this service often functions without regard to the law, and encourages their clients to do the same?
What would you say if you were asked to keep on paying?
If you had a choice, would you do it?
Probably not.
Yet the American people are expected to fund such a program. That program is VAWA.
The full title is the Violence Against Women Act. Originally enacted in 1994, the public believes it helps women who are beaten and hurt by their husbands, but all it really does is set up a massive, nationwide effort to provide employment for the hardcore unemployable, and promote feminist ideology at the expense of unsuspecting families seeking aid. It forces women into lives of poverty, sends innocent men to jail, and damages children for life. It has effectively killed any effort, local or national, to address the very real problem of intimate partner abuse.
VAWA is up for reauthorization in Congress, and the cost has been expanded to nearly a billion dollars per year, and its reach into dating relationships, and the area of elder abuse.
There is no epidemic, no widespread instance of actual cases where women are being beaten. Pregnant women are not being murdered in unprecedented numbers. “One in five” children are not victimized by pedophiles – their fathers, or anyone else. Proponents of this legislation would like you to believe in a pandemic of abuse, but it is simply not true.
Meanwhile there are people with real concerns – some in serious, immediate danger – that need the help of a functioning domestic abuse agency, that is not dependent on the state coalition system, funded and supported by VAWA. It’s true they are a much smaller number than publicized. But in my years of experience with social services programs, the number of victims should not be a consideration. The actual need is what is important.
Potential clients should not be dependent on “qualifying” for programs based on their gender, or that of their children. Yet this process is in effect in every city and county in the country. More often than not, the cities and counties also fund these regressive, and often illegally biased, agencies. Unfortunately, they don’t realize they could save a huge amount of money by addressing the problem as it is, and recognizing it as a much smaller problem than their VAWA-based agencies have led them to believe.
Do we really want to keep giving money to people who can’t help anyone, and are only interested in protecting their jobs?
*Only unemployed women and those without older boys are allowed to access so-called "women's shelters." Everyone else, including men, are excluded.