PDA

View Full Version : Repukes vote against Al Franken's anti-rape bill



kwame k
10-15-2009, 11:57 PM
Washington, D.C. [Oct 6, 2009] – Today, the amendment offered by U.S. Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) to stop funding defense contractors who deny assault victims their day in court passed the United States Senate by a vote of 68 - 30

Last Thursday, Sen. Franken introduced an amendment (S.2588) to the FY2010 Defense Appropriations Bill that would restrict funding to defense contractors who commit employees to mandatory binding arbitration in the case of sexual assault. The legislation, endorsed by 61 women’s, labor and public interest groups, was inspired by the story of Jamie Leigh Jones, who watched the vote from the Senate gallery today.

Jones was a 19-yr-old employee of defense contractor KBR (formerly a Halliburton subsidiary) stationed in Iraq who was gang raped by her co-workers and imprisoned in a shipping container when she tried to report the crime. Her father and U.S. Rep. Ted Poe (R-Tex.), worked together to secure her safe return to the United States, but once she was home, she learned a fine-print clause in her KBR contract banned her from taking her case to court, instead forcing her into an “arbitration” process that would be run by KBR itself. Just today, Halliburton filed a petition for a rehearing en banc in the 5th Circuit Court, which means that Jamie’s fight is far from over.

“I’m proud of what we accomplished today,” said Sen. Franken. “Victims of sexual assault deserve their day in court and no corporation should be able to deny them that right. Jamie’s courage in telling her story will help women all over this country and I’m honored to have been a part of that.”

“I am highly honored that Senator Franken and his wife have created this amendment to ensure that others do not have to endure the suffering that I have,” said Jones. “This amendment makes all the hard times that I have gone through, when going public with such a personal tragedy, worth every tear shed from telling and retelling my horrific experience. I know this amendment will save so many in the future.”

Specifically, Sen. Franken’s amendment:

Does not require contractors to change or modify existing employment contracts. It only bars funds to contractors who continue to use these mandatory arbitration clauses in their employment contracts.
Narrowly targets the most egregious violations and applies to defense contracts, many of which are administered abroad, where women are the most vulnerable and least likely to have support resources. The amendment will apply to many contractors that have already demonstrated their incompetence in efficiently carrying out defense contracts, and have further demonstrated their unwillingness and their inability to protect women from sexual assault.
Applies to claims arising out of sexual assault, like assault & battery (including rape), intentional infliction of emotional distress, and negligent hiring, retention, and supervision, as well as Title VII civil rights claims, which were specifically designed to protect vulnerable groups in the workplace.
Leading Minnesota and national organizations who have endorsed Sen. Franken’s amendment include the Minnesota Women Lawyers, the Minnesota Coalition Against Sexual Assault, the Sexual Violence Center, Minnesota NOW, Advocates for Human Rights, the National Alliance to End Sexual Violence, the National Women’s Law Center, the National Partnership for Women and Families, the American Association of University Women, the National Council of La Raza, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, and the Consumer Federation of America. A full list of the 61 endorsing organizations is attached.

“Sexual violence is about a person trying to exercise power and control over another person through unwanted sexual contact and violence,” said Pam Zeller, Executive Director of the Sexual Violence Center. “In arbitration the intent is to arrive at an agreement. This agreement does not have to be equitable in order to be resolved. It is also not intended to resolve a criminal matter. Sexual harassment and sexual violence inherently have an imbalance of power. Submitting a victim of sexual harassment, or sexual assault, to a process of arbitration is a revictimization of the victim, and minimizes the seriousness of the crime of sexual assault. The proposed amendment by Senator Franken will protect victims of sexual harassment and sexual violence from being revictimized through the arbitration process.”

“This amendment reflects a critically important step in safeguarding the rights of those who have experienced discrimination in the form of sexual violence, harassment, and stalking,” said Donna Dunn, Executive Director of the Minnesota Coalition Against Sexual Assault. “We know that justice for victims of violence often seems elusive. It is very important that each person have the right to assess and choose the options that they believe best fit their needs. This amendment is a giant step in that direction.”

"No survivor of sexual assault should be denied the ability to seek justice,” said Terri Poore, Policy Chair of the National Alliance to End Sexual Violence. “Asking a victim to enter into arbitration with someone who raped her or a company that wouldn't protect her is outrageous and sends a clear message that such violence is simply not taken seriously."

Link (http://franken.senate.gov/press/?page=release&release_item=Frankens_Proposal_To_Guarantee_Sexual _Assault_Victims_Their_Day_In_Court___)

kwame k
10-16-2009, 12:01 AM
30 Repukes voted against this amendment!!!!!!! So they have a problem that an employer can put a clause that you can not sue if you get raped working for them by other employees.

So basically Repukes will vote against anything that the Dems propose, regardless of how logical or right it is.

bueno bob
10-16-2009, 01:23 AM
Shouldn't be surprising. Republicans have been raping America in one fashion or another for at least the last 70 years...not surprising to find that they're really pretty big fans of the concept.

chefcraig
10-16-2009, 10:49 AM
Here's Jon Stewart's take, from The Moderate Voice website. Stewart makes an interesting and quite valid point: How can you be against funding ACORN because of corruption concerns, yet on the other hand wish to stay out of this because it isn't the concern of the government to involve itself with a business's internal corruption? http://www.easyfreesmileys.com/smileys/free-confused-smileys-327.gif (http://www.easyfreesmileys.com/Free-Cold-Smileys/)

Jon Stewart on the ‘Franken Anti-Government-Contractor Rape Liability Bill’ | The Moderate Voice (http://themoderatevoice.com/49622/jon-stewart-on-the-franken-anti-government-contractor-rape-liability-bill/)

Va Beach VH Fan
10-16-2009, 11:01 AM
<table style='font:11px arial; color:#333; background-color:#f5f5f5' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='0' width='360' height='353'><tbody><tr style='background-color:#e5e5e5' valign='middle'><td style='padding:2px 1px 0px 5px;'><a target='_blank' style='color:#333; text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com'>The Daily Show With Jon Stewart</a></td><td style='padding:2px 5px 0px 5px; text-align:right; font-weight:bold;'>Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c</td></tr><tr style='height:14px;' valign='middle'><td style='padding:2px 1px 0px 5px;' colspan='2'<a target='_blank' style='color:#333; text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-october-14-2009/rape-nuts'>Rape-Nuts<a></td></tr><tr style='height:14px; background-color:#353535' valign='middle'><td colspan='2' style='padding:2px 5px 0px 5px; width:360px; overflow:hidden; text-align:right'><a target='_blank' style='color:#96deff; text-decoration:none; font-weight:bold;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com/'>www.thedailyshow.com</a></td></tr><tr valign='middle'><td style='padding:0px;' colspan='2'><embed style='display:block' src='http://media.mtvnservices.com/mgid:cms:item:comedycentral.com:252468' width='360' height='301' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' wmode='window' allowFullscreen='true' flashvars='autoPlay=false' allowscriptaccess='always' allownetworking='all' bgcolor='#000000'></embed></td></tr><tr style='height:18px;' valign='middle'><td style='padding:0px;' colspan='2'><table style='margin:0px; text-align:center' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='0' width='100&#37;' height='100%'><tr valign='middle'><td style='padding:3px; width:33%;'><a target='_blank' style='font:10px arial; color:#333; text-decoration:none;' href='http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes'>Daily Show<br/> Full Episodes</a></td><td style='padding:3px; width:33%;'><a target='_blank' style='font:10px arial; color:#333; text-decoration:none;' href='http://www.indecisionforever.com'>Political Humor</a></td><td style='padding:3px; width:33%;'><a target='_blank' style='font:10px arial; color:#333; text-decoration:none;' href='http://www.indecisionforever.com/2009/09/23/ron-paul-on-the-daily-show-tuesday-sept-29/'>Ron Paul Interview</a></td></tr></table></td></tr></tbody></table>

Guitar Shark
10-16-2009, 11:50 AM
Classic

Kristy
10-16-2009, 12:31 PM
Jones was a 19-yr-old employee of defense contractor KBR (formerly a Halliburton subsidiary) stationed in Iraq who was gang raped by her co-workers and imprisoned in a shipping container when she tried to report the crime. Her father and U.S. Rep. Ted Poe (R-Tex.), worked together to secure her safe return to the United States, but once she was home, she learned a fine-print clause in her KBR contract banned her from taking her case to court, instead forcing her into an “arbitration” process that would be run by KBR itself. Just today, Halliburton filed a petition for a rehearing en banc in the 5th Circuit Court, which means that Jamie’s fight is far from over.


I have little respect for Franklin. This isn't so much about a bill to prosecute those big contractors who rape a coworker as much as it is him grinding his axe towards the Death Star Empire known as Haliburton. Franklin's heart may be in the right place but he doesn't know how to fight the battle(s) he picks. Seems that no one ever told him that when you go after a snake you cut off the head not simply grab it by the tail. Yeah, best of luck, Al.

As for the the Rethuglicans the vote to block this Bill doesn't surprise me when one stops to consider just how many Rethugs take refuge in Haliburton's back pocket. Just another "don't rock the boat" in order to save face for your career at any cost. Sad, really when you read this because this convenient and superficial "justice" that the Rethuglican Party pontificates on about while at the same time seeing that Jones will never have a proper day in court.

In the meantime, I'll be waiting for Yngwie's take on the matter.

Guitar Shark
10-16-2009, 12:42 PM
Just for clarification, the Stewart clip is somewhat misleading. The employment contract doesn't prevent the rape victim from pursuing a claim at all - it just requires that the claim be brought in arbitration, rather than in court. Employers and employees sign arbitration agreements all the time, and they are usually enforceable.

With that said, I would have serious reservations about enforcing an arbitration clause in the case of a rape.

I'm not saying it's a defensible position, but the Stewart clip kind of glossed over this.

Nitro Express
10-16-2009, 12:43 PM
Actually it's the people who can cut the snake's head off. Politicians tend to be corrupt anyways and their sick personality faults is what makes them want to go into politics. The thing is when enough of the people just say "fuck you!" we aren't doing it, the people at the top lose their power base. It's quite effective. Like the company in France who tried to screw workers out of their severance pay and the workers threatened to burn the workplace down and the company gave in. Why there is endless raping is the American people have lost their balls. Plus, the bastards are so far in debt, they need the paycheck so they are too broke to go on strike. Pathetic. We make fun of the French but these are the people sticking up to the abuse and winning. Without workers and customers, these companies are nothing. As long as we bend over, they will ass rape us.

kwame k
10-16-2009, 12:53 PM
Just for clarification, the Stewart clip is somewhat misleading. The employment contract doesn't prevent the rape victim from pursuing a claim at all - it just requires that the claim be brought in arbitration, rather than in court. Employers and employees sign arbitration agreements all the time, and they are usually enforceable.

With that said, I would have serious reservations about enforcing an arbitration clause in the case of a rape.

I'm not saying it's a defensible position, but the Stewart clip kind of glossed over this.

Wait a minute, was it a blanket arbitration clause for anything? I can't see arbitration being upheld for anything as serious as gang-rape or murder. I would think that no matter what you signed, the seriousness of the crime would supersede any contract.

Guitar Shark
10-16-2009, 12:56 PM
Not sure, kwame. I haven't seen the contract.

But reading the article again, it says that KBR would have "run" the arbitration, which makes no sense to me. I've never heard of an arbitration conducted by the employer. I am hoping that's just poor journalism.

If anyone finds the contract, post it here! I think it would be interesting.

kwame k
10-16-2009, 01:01 PM
Not sure, kwame. I haven't seen the contract.

But reading the article again, it says that KBR would have "run" the arbitration, which makes no sense to me. I've never heard of an arbitration conducted by the employer. I am hoping that's just poor journalism.

If anyone finds the contract, post it here! I think it would be interesting.

Same thing I was thinking, normally arbitration is done by a neutral third party.

letsrock
10-16-2009, 07:46 PM
Same thing I was thinking, normally arbitration is done by a neutral third party.

Typically done that way.

Nickdfresh
10-16-2009, 08:24 PM
...Employers and employees sign arbitration agreements all the time, and they are usually enforceable.

With that said, I would have serious reservations about enforcing an arbitration clause in the case of a rape.
....


I have a problem with arbitration clauses in general. They should be completely voluntary and never be a condition of employment --or-- the results should be nonbinding to either side of the litigation as everyone knows that the arbitration is often controlled by firms with ties to the company in question.

Nickdfresh
10-16-2009, 08:26 PM
Not sure, kwame. I haven't seen the contract.

But reading the article again, it says that KBR would have "run" the arbitration, which makes no sense to me. I've never heard of an arbitration conducted by the employer. I am hoping that's just poor journalism.

If anyone finds the contract, post it here! I think it would be interesting.


I've heard of arbitrations run by parties with clear ties to the employer...

thome
10-16-2009, 08:39 PM
I hope they veto everything this ass says, and then drum this douche out of town.

Perhaps we could make a couple hundred thousand other laws about rape on lt's see...hmm.... thursdays at the corner of Main a 17th street...or if you a defense contractor ......Oops.....It's "AL" the buzzword name dropping candy ass.

Hey Al there are some sorry streets and they need some pot holes fixed, Do your fukkinf job, and get off your actor/commedy, sadistic need for press time.

I bet his next bill has the words Oprah and Dr. Phil in it.

All these stupid Mf'ers trying to act thier way into the history books, with key, topical, buzzwords in thier bills and speeches SUKKIT!

and you morons who think it's something else...Pfffffffft!

kwame k
10-16-2009, 08:58 PM
I hope they veto everything this ass says, and then drum this douche out of town.

Perhaps we could make a couple hundred thousand other laws about rape on lt's see...hmm.... thursdays at the corner of Main a 17th street...or if you a defense contractor ......Oops.....It's "AL" the buzzword name dropping candy ass.

Hey Al there are some sorry streets and they need some pot holes fixed, Do your fukkinf job, and get off your actor/commedy, sadistic need for press time.

I bet his next bill has the words Oprah and Dr. Phil in it.

All these stupid Mf'ers trying to act thier way into the history books, with key, topical, buzzwords in thier bills and speeches SUKKIT!

and you morons who think it's something else...Pfffffffft!

Yeah, the nerve of the guy wanting government contractors to not have their God given American rights to cover-up gang rape by their employees. Fucking communist/socialistic Franken.

This is not the America I know and love.

thome
10-16-2009, 09:17 PM
Yeah, the nerve of the guy wanting government contractors to not have their God given American rights to cover-up gang rape by their employees. Fucking communist/socialistic Franken.

This is not the America I know and love.

Were you there..?

No company advocates this, to assume so is the problem with america.


to stop funding defense contractors who deny assault

Yeap what you saidFucking communist/socialistic Franken.

and what the HELL IS GODDAMN "ANTI RAPE"

Fight the Power!

Blackflag
10-17-2009, 12:47 AM
Just for clarification, the Stewart clip is somewhat misleading. The employment contract doesn't prevent the rape victim from pursuing a claim at all - it just requires that the claim be brought in arbitration, rather than in court. Employers and employees sign arbitration agreements all the time, and they are usually enforceable.

With that said, I would have serious reservations about enforcing an arbitration clause in the case of a rape.

I'm not saying it's a defensible position, but the Stewart clip kind of glossed over this.

They're also taking advantage of the fact that these are civil claims and it has no bearing on whether there would be a criminal prosecution. Misleading.

And it also applies to any civil Title VII claims, so it really does away with employment arbitration clauses for any discrimination or sexual harassment claims, not just rape. For defense contractors anyways...and who does that include? Everybody from Microsoft to Frito Lay?

This is one of those "why do you hate rape victims?" arguments. :lmao:

Blackflag
10-17-2009, 12:48 AM
I have a problem with arbitration clauses in general. They should be completely voluntary

I don't like arbitration clauses, either, but employment is completely voluntary.

If the point is to do away with all arbitration clauses, then they should say so, and not pretend it's about rape victims.

Nickdfresh
10-17-2009, 05:48 PM
I don't like arbitration clauses, either, but employment is completely voluntary.

Not when there's effectively collusion and every employer doing it now...


If the point is to do away with all arbitration clauses, then they should say so, and not pretend it's about rape victims.

I don't know if that's their point...

Little Texan
10-17-2009, 11:04 PM
I hope they veto everything this ass says, and then drum this douche out of town.

Perhaps we could make a couple hundred thousand other laws about rape on lt's see...hmm.... thursdays at the corner of Main a 17th street...or if you a defense contractor ......Oops.....It's "AL" the buzzword name dropping candy ass.

Hey Al there are some sorry streets and they need some pot holes fixed, Do your fukkinf job, and get off your actor/commedy, sadistic need for press time.

I bet his next bill has the words Oprah and Dr. Phil in it.

All these stupid Mf'ers trying to act thier way into the history books, with key, topical, buzzwords in thier bills and speeches SUKKIT!

and you morons who think it's something else...Pfffffffft!

Someone needs RosettaStone to figure out WTF you're going on about most of the time!

http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n298/denco428/thomegibberish.jpg

Big Train
10-18-2009, 11:11 AM
I have a problem with arbitration clauses in general. They should be completely voluntary and never be a condition of employment --or-- the results should be nonbinding to either side of the litigation as everyone knows that the arbitration is often controlled by firms with ties to the company in question.

I can agree to this in the case of what we have here, a criminal act. If it is just run of the mill "why did you fire me" or "you owe me more money" claims, I would think arbitration is still the most cost effective route.

lesfunk
10-18-2009, 05:20 PM
I'm all for Raping Al Franken! as long as I don't have to participate

Nickdfresh
10-18-2009, 08:40 PM
I'm all for Raping Al Franken! as long as I don't have to participate

Maybe you should make sweet love to him then?