YWCA USA Washington Update

Supplemental Spending Bill Signed Into Law

On June 30th the President signed into law the supplemental spending bill to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition to the war funding, the bill provides an extension of unemployment benefits, a delay of six Medicaid regulations, funding for disaster relief, and funding for veteran’s education benefits. Specifically, the bill will provide up to 13 weeks of extended unemployment benefits to workers who have exhausted their 26 weeks of unemployment benefits and will provide a full-four year college education to veterans.

Congress Takes Action on Housing

During the week of July 7th the Senate continued work on the Housing and Economic Recovery Act (H.R. 3221). The bill includes a number of important provisions that address the housing needs of low-income individuals including the creation of an affordable housing trust fund, and a provision allowing tax exempt housing revenue bonds to be used for Single Room Occupancy units (SRO's). These provisions are important to the YWCA USA as local YWCAs provide housing, including SRO units, for low-income women. Once the Senate passes the bill it will be sent to the House.

Child Tax Credit Now Moves To Senate

On June 25, 2008 the House passed the Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act of 2008 (H.R. 6049) which would allow more working poor families to be eligible for the Child Tax Credit (CTC). Currently, middle- and many upper-income families receive a $1,000 CTC for each child age 17 and under when they file their federal income taxes. In addition, some working families who do not owe federal income taxes but have minimum earnings of $12,050 receive at least a partial CTC. Because of the minimum earning requirement, many families do not qualify for the CTC. In addition, each year the minimum amount needed to qualify for the CTC is adjusted (raised) for inflation. Thus, each year more and more families are deemed ineligible for the CTC.

H.R. 6049 would allow more families to be eligible for the CTC as it lowers the minimum amount necessary for receiving CTC from $12,050 to $8,500 and removes the inflation adjustment. In the Senate, Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) has introduced a bill with a $10,000 minimum.

Victim of Crime Act Funding Sees Increase but Need Remains

In a win for advocates and survivors of crime, both the House and Senate have voted to raise the Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) fund cap. The Victims of Crime Fund (VOCA) is a source of funding for victim assistance programs and victim compensation programs which is entirely made up of money collected from federal criminals through penalties, fees and fines. In 2000, Congress limited (capped) the amount of money that could be removed each year from the fund and since 2006, the VOCA cap has been lowered every year. This year, House Appropriations Committee approved increasing the cap to $650 million while the Senate Appropriations Committee approved increasing the VOCA cap to $635 million. While advocates applaud these initial steps in the right direction we will continue urging Congress to restore the cap to 2006 levels.

Early Education and Violence Against Women Funding

On Thursday, June 26, 2008 the Senate Appropriations Committee approved the Labor, Health and Human Services and Education (Labor-H bill) appropriations bill by a vote of 26-3. The bill provides $154.9 billion dollars to fund programs in the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services and Education; $9.5 billion dollars more in funding than requested by the President.
Under the bill critical programs that address violence against women and the need for early education have been given increases over the Fiscal Year 2008 level (FY08).· Head Start is funded at $7.102 billion for FY09 or $223 million dollars above the FY08 level; · the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act (FVPSA) program that supports victim services at local battered women’s shelters and domestic violence programs is funded at $125 million or $2.4 million dollars above the FY08 level;· the National Domestic Violence Hotline has been fully funded at $3.5 million; and·the Rape Prevention and Education program is funded at $43 million dollars or $1.2 million dollars above the FY08 level.

The next step is for the full Senate to vote on the Senator Labor-H bill. On the House side, the House Appropriations Committee has yet to complete its work on their Labor-H bill.
Violence Against Women FundingOn Wednesday, June 25, 2008 the House Appropriations Committee approved the Commerce, Justice and Science (CJS) Appropriations Bill for FY09. The House CJS bill provides $56.9 billion dollars to fund programs in the Departments of Commerce, Justice, and related agencies. Under the bill, Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) programs received $435 million or a $35 million dollar increase over FY2008. The increase in funding provides additional money for the STOP (Services, Training, Officers, Prosecutors) Grant Program, the Legal Assistance to Victims Program and the Rural Grant Program, the transitional housing program, the Sexual Assault Services Program (SASP) as well as other programs focused on serving targeted populations. The next step is for the full House to vote on their CJS bill.
On the Senate side, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved their Commerce, Justice and Science (CJS) Appropriations Bill for FY09 on June 23, 2008. The Senate CJS bill provides $57.9 billion to fund programs in the Departments of Commerce, Justice and related agencies. Under the bill, Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) programs received $415 million or $20 million less that the House CJS bill. However, similar to the House bill the increase in funding provides additional money for the STOP (Services, Training, Officers, and Prosecutors) Grant Program, the Legal Assistance to Victims Program and the Rural Grant Program, the Sexual Assault Services Program (SASP) as well as other programs focused on serving targeted populations. The next step is for the full Senate to vote on their CJS bill.

Supreme Court Rules in Key Cases

In a 5-4 decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled in the case of Patrick Kennedy v. State of Louisiana that an individual who commits the rape of a child rape cannot be sentenced to death.
In the decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the Eighth Amendment categorically bars the use of capital punishment for the rape of a child regardless of any circumstances including physical or psychological harm to the child, age of the victim, perpetrator history, or violent nature of the event(s). The decision was based on the case of Patrick Kennedy who was convicted of brutally raping his stepdaughter and was sentenced under Louisiana state law to death for his crime.
The majority opinion written by Justice Anthony Kennedy was supported by Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Steven Breyer.

Groups who work with and advocate for child victims of sexual assault urged the court not to support the death penalty for child rapists arguing that it would inflict more harm on the child victim and might prevent victims and their families from coming forward if a known family member or friend is the perpetrator.

Justice Samuel Alito wrote the dissenting opinion and was supported by Chief Justice John Roberts, and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. Presidential candidates Senator John McCain and Senator Barack Obama both expressed disappointment with the courts decision. According to Associated Press, “the decision resonated in the presidential campaign, too, where both Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama objected to it. Obama said there should be no blanket prohibition of the death penalty for the rape of children if states want to apply it in those cases. McCain called the ruling, ‘an assault on law enforcement's efforts to punish these heinous felons for the most despicable crime.’”

The Patrick Kennedy v. State of Louisiana ruling follows a previous Supreme Court case which ruled that an individual who commits the rape of an adult woman cannot be sentenced to death.
In addition to the Patrick Kennedy v. State of Louisiana case, another Supreme Court case will impact women and girls who are victims of violence. In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled in Giles v. California that an individual on trial for a crime has the right under the Sixth Amendment to confront witnesses against them and that death of a witness does not undermine this right. The decision was based on the case of Dwayne Giles who was convicted of murdering his then girlfriend, Brenda Avie, by shooting her six times.

During the trial, a police officer testified that Ms. Avie informed him of Mr. Giles’ previous history of domestic violence, including threats to kill her. The judge in the case allowed the police officer’s second-hand testimony even though Mr. Giles was unable to confront Ms. Avie directly about the allegations, as is allowed under the Sixth Amendment’s confrontation clause, because Ms. Avie was a victim of murder as a result of Mr. Giles actions. The Supreme Court disagreed and instead ruled that that the police officer’s testimony about the history of violence and fear of death was inadmissible because it violated the Sixth Amendment right of Mr. Giles to confront Ms. Avie directly about the allegations.

The majority opinion was written by Justice Antonin Scalia and was supported by Chief Justice John Roberts, and Justices Clarence Thomas, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg. The minority opinion was written by Justice Steven Breyer and supported by Justices Anthony Kennedy and John Paul Stevens.As a result of this ruling, advocates who work with domestic violence victims should be more aggressive in documenting the abuse. Documentation can help prove in a court of law that domestic violence clients 1) suffered physical harm, threats, intimidation and other consequences of seeking help from providers, police, or the courts, 2) if the abuser had/has a history of retaliation in situations where the victim sought help (which would prove his intent to prevent the victim’s to speak out about the abuse, including testifying at a trial), and 3) if the abuser has a history of, or has engaged in, attempting to isolate the victim from family, friends, the community, service providers, or other opportunities to get help.