Statement Of Senator Patrick Leahy,
Senate Consideration Of The Reauthorization
Of The Violence Against Women Act, S. 1197
October 5, 2005

I am pleased that the full Senate has finally taken up, considered and passed the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, S. 1197, bipartisan legislation that will further our goal of ending domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking.  The enactment of the Violence Against Women Act over a decade ago marked an important national commitment to survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault.  I am proud to join Senators Biden, Hatch, Specter and others as an original cosponsor of this important measure, which currently has 58 cosponsors in total.  I want to especially recognize Senator Biden for his commitment to ending violence against women and children.

Earlier in my career as a prosecutor in Vermont, I witnessed the devastating effects of domestic violence.  Violence and abuse affect people of all walks of life every day and regardless of gender, race, culture, age, class or sexuality.  Such violence is a crime and it is always wrong, whether the abuser is a family member, someone the victim is dating, a current or past spouse, boyfriend, or girlfriend, an acquaintance or a stranger.

The National Crime Victimization Survey estimates there were 691,710 non-fatal, violent incidents committed against victims by current and former spouses, boyfriends or girlfriends – also known as intimate partners – during 2001.  Of those incidents, 85 percent were against women.  The rate of non-fatal intimate partner violence against women has fallen steadily since 1993, when the rate was 9.8 incidents per 1,000 people.  In 2001, the number fell to 5.0 incidents per 1,000 people, nearly a 50 percent reduction, but still unacceptably high.  Tragically, however, the survey found that 1,600 women were killed in 1976 by a current or former spouse or boyfriend, while in 2000 some 1,247 women were killed by their intimate partners.

According to the annual Vermont Crime Report, the number of forcible rapes reported in Vermont increased in 2004 to the highest level in seven years, while the amount of violent crime remained unchanged and overall crime fell by about 5 percent from 2003.  Reported incidents of rape rose by 58 percent, from 117 in 2003 to 185 in 2004.  The average age of the victim was 21, 47 percent of victims were younger than 18 years old, in 74 percent of the cases the perpetrator was an acquaintance of the victim, and in a quarter of the cases the defendant was a family member or intimate partner of the victim.  In only 1 percent of the cases was the perpetrator a stranger.  These figures cause me great concern because violent crime has declined nationwide during that same time period.  Numbers like these are why reauthorizing VAWA is so vital.

Our Nation has made remarkable progress over the past 25 years in recognizing that domestic violence and sexual assault are crimes.  We have responded with better laws, social support and coordinated community responses.  Millions of women, men, children and families, however, continue to be traumatized by abuse, leading to increased rates of crime, violence and suffering.

The Violence Against Women Act has provided aid to law enforcement officers and prosecutors, helped stem domestic violence and child abuse, established training programs for victim advocates and counselors, and trained probation and parole officers who work with released sex offenders.  Now we on the Judiciary Committee and then the rest of our colleagues in Congress have the opportunity to reauthorize VAWA and make improvements to vital core programs, tighten criminal penalties against domestic abusers, and create new solutions to other crucial aspects of domestic violence and sexual assault.  This is an opportunity to help treat children victims of violence, augment health care for rape victims, hold repeat offenders and Internet stalkers accountable, and help domestic violence victims keep their jobs.

Included in VAWA 2005 are reauthorizations of two programs that I initially sponsored that are vital to helping rural communities battle domestic violence in a setting in which isolation can make it more difficult for both victims and law enforcement.  In a small, rural state like Vermont, our county and local law enforcement agencies rely heavily on cooperative, interagency efforts to combat and solve significant problems.  That is why I sought to include the Rural Domestic Violence and Child Victimization Enforcement Grant Program as part of the original VAWA. This program helps make services available to rural victims and children by encouraging community involvement in developing a coordinated response to combat domestic violence, dating violence and child abuse.  Adequate resources combined with sustained commitment will bring about significant improvements in rural areas to the lives of those victimized by domestic and sexual violence.

The Rural Grants Program section of VAWA 2005 reauthorizes and expands the existing education, training and services grant programs that address violence against women in rural areas.  This provision renews the rural VAWA program, extends direct grants to state and local governments for services in rural areas and expands areas to include community collaboration projects in rural areas and the creation or expansion of additional victim services.  This provision includes new language that expands the program coverage to sexual assault, child sexual assault and stalking.  It also expands eligibility from rural states to rural communities, increasing access to rural sections of otherwise highly populated states.  This section authorizes $55,000,000 annually for 2006 through 2010, which is an increase of $15 million per year.

The second grant program initiative on which I have focused is the Transitional Housing Assistance Grants for Victims of Domestic Violence, Dating Violence, Sexual Assault or Stalking.  This program, which became law as part of the PROTECT Act of 2003, authorizes grants for transitional housing and related services for people fleeing domestic violence, sexual assault or stalkers.  At a time when the availability of affordable housing has sunk to record lows, transitional housing for victims is especially needed.  Today more than 50 percent of homeless individuals are women and children fleeing domestic violence.  We have a clear problem that is in dire need of a solution.  This program is part of the solution.

Transitional housing allows women to bridge the gap between leaving violence in their homes and becoming self-sufficient.  Our bill, VAWA 2005, amends the existing transitional housing program by expanding the current direct-assistance grants to include funds for operational, capital and renovation costs.  Other changes include providing services to victims of dating violence, sexual assault and stalking; extending the length of time for receipt of benefits to match that used by Housing and Urban Development transitional housing programs; and updating the existing program to reflect the concerns of the service provision community.  The provision would increase the authorized funding for the grant from $30,000,000 to $40,000,000.

Regrettably, this important bill was saddled in Committee with an extraneous and ill-considered amendment, offered by Senator Kyl, relating to the national DNA database.  Current law permits States to collect DNA samples from arrested individuals and to include arrestee information in State DNA databases.  In addition, States may use arrestee information to search the national DNA database for a possible “hit.”  The only thing that States may not do is upload arrestee information into the national database before a person has been formally charged with a crime.  

Under the Kyl amendment, arrestee information can go into the national database immediately upon arrest, before formal charges are filed, and even if no charges are ever brought.  This adds little or no value for law enforcement, while intruding on the privacy rights of people who are, in our system, presumed innocent.  It could also provide an incentive for pretextual and race-based stops and arrests for the purpose of DNA sampling.  Congress rejected this very proposal less than a year ago, after extended negotiations and consultation with the Department of Justice.

The Kyl amendment would also make it harder for innocent people to have their DNA expunged from a state database.  Under current law, if a State chooses to enter a person’s DNA profile into its database before the person is convicted of a crime, then the State must automatically expunge that information in the event that no conviction is obtained.  Under the new language, even a person who is arrested in error and released without charge would need to obtain a court order before his DNA information could be removed from the database.

Databases are important tools to solving crime, but there are limits to what should be included in databases.  The Kyl amendment raises serious privacy concerns that cannot be justified by any legitimate law enforcement need.  I opposed it in Committee, I continue to oppose it in its current form, and I will press for its exclusion in conference.

VAWA 2005 is an important part of our efforts to increase awareness of the problem of violence, to save the lives of battered women, rape victims and children who grow up with violence and to continue progress against the devastating tragedy of domestic violence.  I look forward to working with Senators Specter and Biden, Congressmen Sensenbrenner and Conyers and other members of the upcoming conference to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act and thus strengthen the prevention of violence against women and children and its devastating costs and consequences.

# # # # #