Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand blamed the White House’s lack of support for the failure of her sexual-assault bill in the Senate on Thursday, and she vowed to keep fighting to reform the military justice system.
“I made my greatest case, I advocated for this position, this reform, and the president has been very clear: He wants to end sexual assault in the military, he wants it to be further studied, and he wants to see progress and whether it’s been accomplished in the next year,” the New York Democrat said at a press conference after her bill went down.
When asked if she would have succeeded if President Obama had pushed for her bill and whether she was disappointed by the White House’s lack of support, she quickly answered, “Yes, yes.”
The legislation, which was fought mightily by the Pentagon and championed by victim-advocacy groups, would have stripped from commanders the power to decide which sexual-assault cases are prosecuted. It failed to attract the 60 votes necessary to overcome a procedural hurdle to pass the bill on a vote of 55 to 45.
Leading up to the vote, Gillibrand had said she had 55 supporters and was confident she would pick up more. Although she did indeed pick up two undecideds, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Republican Mike Enzi of Wyoming, she also lost two cosponsors: Tom Carper, D-Del., and Mark Kirk, R-Ill.
Carper voted against the bill because the president has asked the military to conduct a review of its efforts to combat sexual assault, which is due in December, according to an aide. In a statement ordering the review last year, Obama said that if current efforts do not work, then additional reforms should be considered, which was seen by many as squelching support for Gillibrand’s reform.
Kirk said he believed Gillibrand’s bill could make the military weaker.
“I co-sponsored Senator Gillibrand’s legislation because I strongly believe that victims of sexual assault should always be protected, but ultimately supported the bipartisan McCaskill alternative because “¦ [Gillibrand’s] broad scope could jeopardize our readiness and our military stationed in the field.”
Without a boost for the legislation in the Senate, it appears dead for now, particularly since similar legislation has languished in the House for so long.
A companion House bill to Gillibrand’s from GOP Rep. Dan Benishek of Michigan has 71 cosponsors but has gone nowhere.
Another bill from Democratic Rep. Jackie Speier of California, which has stalled since it was first introduced in 2011, has 157 cosponsors. It would also remove commanders from the decision to prosecute sexual assaults and would place jurisdiction in the newly created, autonomous Sexual Assault Oversight and Response Office, which is comprised of civilian and military experts. The office would be under military purview.
Even though Gillibrand failed to pass her legislation, she did drum up more support than many thought possible, considering the broad opposition from the military’s top brass and Armed Services Committee leaders.
Victim-advocacy groups who support the Gillibrand bill said that it was an important step to finally see a vote after so many fits and starts, but that the increased buzz on the issue still needs to be followed up with decisive legislative action.
“The attention has generated some helpful steps,” said Susan Burke, an attorney who collaborates with Protect Our Defenders on sexual-assault cases. “The problem is that it is like building a house on a faulty foundation. It’s a waste of time and money if you don’t fix the structural problems.”
Prominent fellow Democrat and former sexual-assault prosecutor Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri lobbied colleagues hard against the Gillibrand bill for months, arguing it could lead to fewer prosecutions, not more, by removing commanders’ power.
She offered a noncontroversial alternative, building off reforms that were adopted last year in the defense authorization act, which is expected to sail through the Senate next week. The bill was moved ahead in a 100-0 procedural vote Thursday, but a vote on final passage was delayed for unrelated scheduling issues.
Gillibrand said she does not plan to change her bill to ease opposition, and she plans to press for its inclusion in the next defense authorization round, where she says she can continue to build support if the military fails to fix the problem.
“Many people said to me, ‘Kirsten, I’m going to watch this; if it doesn’t get better within the next six months, I’m with you next time,’ ” she said. “So for a number of people, an incremental step was more meaningful to them, and they wanted to see what happened. I think there will be many more senators who will side with us, because this is a huge problem.”
For her part, McCaskill said she is hoping to fast track her reform package in the House, and if not, roll it into the next defense authorization.
Her bill would eliminate a soldier’s good military character from being considered part of his defense. It would allow victim input in prosecutions, allow sexual-assault victims to challenge unfair discharge from the service, make it easier for prosecutors to recommend courts-martial for sexual-assault cases, increase commander accountability, and extend recently adopted reforms to military academies.
The debate has been full of drama and colored by butting egos. McCaskill said she did not enjoy being cast in the media as against victims, having attack ads run against her by victim groups, or battling her determined Democratic colleague.
“That’s no fun,” she said. “But because I was so confident that the policy was right, it is something that I couldn’t have slept at night if I would have folded on this, because I really feel strongly that this is the right policy.”
McCaskill said she plans to start focusing on boosting sexual-assault reporting and services on college campuses and wants to go back to working with Gillibrand to ensure sexual-assault reforms are implemented.
“It will be a relief to get back to Kirsten Gillibrand and I working lockstep to make sure that all these reforms are implemented in a way that protects victims and bring perpetrators to prison where they belong,” she said.
Gillibrand said she is reviewing why convictions so often result in slaps on the wrist and is pressing the armed services for more data on how cases were handled.
Both Gillibrand and McCaskill said they also plan to focus efforts to address suicides and post-traumatic stress problems related to sexual assaults in the military, with an eye toward improving services and treatment offered.
What We're Following See More »
After more than a month of back and forth, a failed bill, and GOP embarrassment, the ultra-conservative House Freedom Caucus has announced that it will support the Obamacare replacement legislation in its most recent iteration. Rep. Mark Meadows, the chairman of the caucus, said the roughly 30 members of the caucus view this compromise as the best option short of a full repeal. A recent amendment, authored by Meadows and Rep. Tom McArthur, co-chair of the more moderate Tuesday Group, would allow states to apply for waivers exempting them from provisions forbidding insurers from charging higher prices to those with pre-existing conditions if the state set up a high-risk pool. The plan's passage in the House is not a done deal though, as a number of moderate lawmakers have resisted supporting the amendment.
"A U.S. Navy guided-missile destroyer fired a warning flare toward an Iranian Revolutionary Guard vessel coming near it in the Persian Gulf. The incident happened Monday as the vessel closed to within 1,000 meters of the USS Mahan, "despite the destroyer trying to turn away from it." After attempting to contact the Iranian vessel and sounding its whistle, it deployed the flare. After that, the ship had had enough and turned away.
U.S. District Judge William Orrick Tuesday blocked the Trump administration from enforcing part of an executive order calling for the end of federal funding to so-called sanctuary cities. The decision was followed by a scathing rebuke from the White House, a precedent-breaking activity which with this White House has had no qualms. A White House statement called the decision an "egregious overreach by a single, unelected district judge." The statement was followed by an inaccurate Wednesday morning tweetstorm from Trump, which railed against the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. While Judge Orrick's district falls within the jurisdiction of the Ninth Circuit, Orrick himself does not serve on the Ninth Circuit.
"House Republicans are circulating the text of an amendment to their ObamaCare replacement bill that they believe could bring many conservatives on board. According to legislative text of the amendment," drafted by Rep. Tom MacArthur (R-NJ), "the measure would allow states to apply for waivers to repeal one of ObamaCare’s core protections for people with pre-existing conditions. Conservatives argue the provision drives up premiums for healthy people, but Democrats—and many more moderate Republicans—warn it would spark a return to the days when insurance companies could charge sick people exorbitantly high premiums."