Saturday, Feb 11, 2012
workaround

Donate Now tile

User login

To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.




workaround



Triangle Park Creative

Franken anti-rape provision may be stripped…by a Democrat

October 25, 2009

Huffington Post's Sam Stein is reporting that an amendment to the defense appropriations bill authored by Sen. Al Franken and approved in the Senate two weeks ago may be stripped from the final bill. Thirty Senate Republicans - now commemorated in the satirical web site Republicans for Rape - opposed the measure, which would prohibit government contractors from restricting workers from suing if they are sexually assaulted while on the job. But if the measure is altered or disappears, it'll be a Democrat who's to blame, Stein reports.

"Mulitiple sources" both inside the beltway and in defense-contracting circles tell Stein that Sen. Daniel Inouye, a Democrat from Hawaii and chair of the Senate Committee on Appropriations, may water down or remove the provision, due to pressure from defense-industry lobbyists who fear contractors will be susceptible to lawsuits.

"The defense contractors have been storming his office," said a source with knowledge of the situation. "Inouye either will get the amendment taken out altogether, or water it down significantly. If they water it down, they will take out the Title VII claims. This means that in discrimination cases, they will still force you into a secret forced arbitration on KBR's (or other contractors') own terms - with your chances of prevailing practically zero. The House seems to be very supportive of the original Franken amendment and all in line, but their hands are tied since it originated in the Senate. And since Inouye runs the show on this bill, he can easily take it out to get Republicans and the defense contractors off his back, which looks increasingly likely."

Franken's amendment, however, also has opposition from within the Obama administration. Earlier this week, the Defense Department noted its concerns, stating, "Enforcement would be problematic, especially in cases where privity of contract does not exist between parties within the supply chain that supports a contract. It may be more effective to seek a statutory prohibition of all such arrangements in any business transaction entered into within the jurisdiction of the United States, if these arrangements are deemed to pose an unacceptable method of recourse."

Franken's office tells the Minnesota Independent it won't be making a public comment on the issue. The bill is expected to be sent out of the appropriations committee sometime next week.

The Twin Cities Daily Planet is an edited news source produced by professional journalists working in collaboration with citizen journalists from the local community. We publish original reported news articles, articles republished from media partners, and some content (Free Speech Zone articles, reader-submitted blog entries, comments) that is moderated but not edited. Click here for a complete description of our editorial policies. Support people-powered non-profit journalism! Volunteer, contribute news, or become a member to keep the Daily Planet in orbit.

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

opposition to Franken rape amendment

"Enforcement would be problematic, especially in cases where privity of contract does not exist between parties within the supply chain that supports a contract. It may be more effective to seek a statutory prohibition of all such arrangements in any business transaction entered into within the jurisdiction of the United States, if these arrangements are deemed to pose an unacceptable method of recourse."  This is a quote from the Defense Department about the Franken rape amendment.  What does it mean?  Can someone translate the legalese, please?

Disgusting

A young woman was gang raped and held captive and cannot sue or accuse her rapists due to this clause. That anybody would try to water down this amendment should be voted out. I don't care if they are a democrat or a republican -- YOU'RE OUT!

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <p> <br> <img> <span> <div>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • You may use [google_ad:ad_slot] to display Google Admanager ads within your content.

More information about formatting options

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
workaround

Free Speech Zone

The Free Speech Zone offers a space for contributions from readers, without editing by the TC Daily Planet. This is an open forum for articles that otherwise might not find a place for publication, including news articles, opinion columns, and announcements. The opinions expressed in the Free Speech Zone and Neighborhood Notes, as well as the opinions of bloggers, are their own and not necessarily the opinion of the TC Daily Planet.

Click here to see a display of Twin Cities problem reports, from potholes to neighborhood eyesores. Click here to report a problem. Have you used SeeClickFix? Have you gotten any response from city officials? Let us know - email info@tcdailyplanet.net