news-record.com

BLOGS

Capital Beat

Burr on the Franken amendment

I spoke with U.S. Sen. Richard Burr yesterday about health care and food security for a couple of stories I’m working on. We finished up our conversation talking about his vote on the Franken amendment.

For those who need the back story:

In early October, the Senate was voting on a defense spending bill. Sen. Al Franken, a freshman Democrat from Minnesota, offered an amendment that would set certain conditions on contractors working for the government. As he described it, the amendment would prohibit the Department of Defense from entering into contracts with companies that force their workers to sign certain kinds of arbitration agreements. As explained by the Associated Press:
 


WASHINGTON - The Senate approved a measure Tuesday prohibiting the Defense Department from contracting with companies that require employees to resolve sexual assault allegations and other claims through arbitration.

The Senate voted 68-30 to attach the amendment sponsored by Democratic Sen. Al Franken of Minnesota to a larger defense spending bill. A vote on the full bill was expected later.

Franken said he sponsored the measure in response to the case of former KBR/Halliburton employee Jamie Leigh Jones, who alleges she was raped by co-workers while in Iraq in 2005. She went public with her story in 2007.


The amendment passed and is now part of the Senate version of the bill, which has yet to be reconciled with the House version. Thirty Republican senators, including Burr, voted against the amendment.

This immediately opened those 30 senators up for criticism. As reported by the N+O’s Rob Christensen:


Republican Sen. Richard Burr has been accused by a Democratic opponent of voting against protecting rape victims working as contractors in Iraq, a charge that he denies.

North Carolina Secretary of State Elaine Marshall noted that Burr was one of 30 Republican senators who voted last week against an amendment that grew out of a publicized case of a Halliburton employee who was gang-raped by co-workers.

"Senator Burr has obviously been in Washington too long," said Marshall, who is one of two Democrats who say they will challenge Burr's 2010 bid for a second term. She is also a founder of a rape crisis center. "This is a clear-cut case of right versus wrong, and Richard Burr got it wrong."


Click here for Rob’s story.

I asked Burr why he voted against the amendment. First and foremost, he said, the amendment was opposed by the Defense Department and the Obama administration. More on that opposition is here  and here.

Still, Democrats have developed a talking point that Burr “voted against rape victims” and I would expect to see that line used through much of his 2010 election campaign. So I thought it would be useful to have Burr talk more about this particular vote.

“The Franken amendment did nothing to address rape victims,” Burr said. Instead, he said, the measure would be of more benefit to lawyers. He also argued that someone who had been the victim of sexual assault could bring a case in criminal proceedings.

You can click on this player to listen to my conversation with Burr about the Franken amendment:

And below is the video from CSPAN of Franken introducing and explaining his amendment:

 

Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

westronandnan@aol.com

November 7, 2009 - 10:42 am EST

I can well imagine that Halliburton is upset. Their former CEO/U.S. Vice President is no longer there pushing through "no-bid" contracts for them at un-freakin'-believeable cost to the taxpayers. And, by extension, one might suppose into the cofers of Mr. Cheney.

I'll never understand why the Republicans are opposed to the "little guy" pursuing their claims through the courts when the rich use this means to their advantange at every opportunity. Or else, why are the staffs of large corporations filled with attorneys?

Connie Mack Jr

November 8, 2009 - 2:00 pm EST

November,2009

Much Ado About Nothing

Dear Citizen:
Another several months have flown by and yet another election cycle has come and gone. To hear the talking heads tell it, one would think that Obama was on the ballot and that the Republicans had won great victories, boding a comeback. Neither is true. This past election does not signify a great Republican return to power. What really occurred is what is true in off year elections, where there is no presidential race to inspire the citizens to vote. The majority of Democrats just did not turn out, particularly those who are minorities. When Democrats don’t turn out, Republicans win. That is always why Republicans are trying to do whatever it takes to suppress the vote.
And Doug Hoffman’s loss in New York does not signify that Democrats are likely to prevail either. Have you actually seen him? Here is a link to an appearance he made on the Glenn Beck show: http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/2450 (the interview starts about 4 ½ minutes into the video). For a shorter version, check out the video clip on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-november-2-2009/moment-of-zen---gl.... Judging by the comments, I am not the only one who came away with an unfavorable opinion. He lost simply because: he does not come across well with the electorate, to put it charitably. This is a heavily Republican district and may remain so if given a much better candidate, although the decennial exercise known as re-districting is going to occur and the Democrats hold the power in Congress. You can bet that they are going to engage in gerrymandering, just as the Republicans did when it was their turn.
But none of this really matters. Voting has become a meaningless exercise, as I and other aspiring candidates have learned. There is no difference between the Dumborats and the Republothugs - they are merely two different sides of the same coin. The corporate mobsters and the banksters control the election - regardless of whether it is Obama or McCain or Bush or Gore, the banksters and corporate mobsters always win! Obama is a classic example of this. Where is the hope and change we voted for? Did the troops leave Iraq? Afghanistan? Why can’t meaningful healthcare pass? And look who is serving in positions of power around him - they are all Clinton re-treads or people who have come from Goldman-Sachs or the Federal Reserve bankers. I laugh when people get all exercised by Obama and his alleged “socialism.” He is doing nothing of the sort. He has been groomed for high office since his college days, as has his wife. Wall Street made him what he is and he is paying them back by doing whatever the mobsters want. He is nothing more than a carefully controlled puppet. He is not important; rather, it is the group who pulls his strings.
Need proof? Ask yourself why we cannot have meaningful healthcare. Other civilized nations manage to provide basic healthcare to people. Why can’t we? If we ended the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and used the money spent on killing people to instead improve the lives our citizens, it would be a far better place to live. However, our legislators are in the pockets of the healthcare industry and their army of lobbysists. Congress knows that if they try and regulate the industry too much that they will be shoved out of office. Can’t have that! And so, while I feel that something will ultimately pass, it will be so watered down and laden with loopholes and/or pork so as to be virtually meaningless.
Cindy Sheehan (yes the very same Cindy Sheehan who camped outside the Bush ranch in Texas) was recently in town and I went to see her. Before I hear groans from the audience that she is a Communist or whatever, let me say she is not. Yes, she is left leaning, but that does not make her wrong or what she has to say somehow any less valid.
You know you are right on target when you get vehemently attacked by both the left and the right. Cindy Sheehan has been attacked by the right and left precisely because she speaks the truth about our very rotten system. She is not a Dumborat. The Dumborats loved her when she was bashing Bush and they used her to help get Dumborats elected. However, they abandoned her when she ran against Nancy Pelosi b ecause Cindy is not about left or right, Dumborat or Republothug. Like me, she is an independent and has a Libertarian streak.
She divides America into two classes: the robbed class and the robber class. While I might use different terms, the gist of it is the same. Our children are used to fight and die in these idiotic wars on behalf of Exxon-Mobil, Halliburton, Blackwater/Xe, KBR (Kellogg, Brown & Root) and their ilk, all to make them richer and keep the world safe for the oil pipelines. We have our homes foreclosed on and lose our jobs, but bailouts are given to AIG, Goldman-Sachs, Bank of America and the other Wall Street banksters who are “too big to fail.. When was the last time you or I had a bailout? Banks are stealing our money in one form or another. She has written a book about the 10 Greatest Myths of the Robber Class - you can get her book by going to http://www.cindysheehanssoapbox.com. I got her book - its very easy to read and it echoes a lot of what I have been saying in many of my statements about why Elections Don’t Matter, our supposedly free (its not) Press and the lack of any meaningful distinction between Dumborats and Republothugs. And she proposes some solutions. She recognizes that we cannot fight government with weapons, for we are out manned and outarmed. She has therefore hit on the idea of depriving what I have describe as the “beast” of its “food’, i.e., out money. Taxes are a part of that, but it will not work unless everyone does it.
But there are other ways to starve the beast as well. Stop forking over your hard-earned dollars on stupid stuff - like overdraft or ATM fees. Try to avoid debt at all costs so that you are no longer a slave to the credit card company. Stop joining the military and sentencing your child or family member to involuntary servitude and possible death. It is not noble to fight and die for the corporations. Turn off the idiot box of televison and turn on your mind by reading or obtaining news from alternate sources. For those who can afford to do so and who live in the right area, retrofit your house with solar panels. Stop buying the junk food, loaded with cancer and illness causing substances that has no nutritional value. Each and every one of us can make some small change in our lives to begin to starve our leviathan government.
On the local scene, two rulings by our Supreme Court aroused ire by those who are not lawyers. Recently, the Supreme Court indicated that a ruling of the Court of Appeals in State v. Bowden was “improvidently allowed.” What this means is that the ruling of the Court of Appeals will stand. In tihs particular case, the Court of Appeals ruled that the defendant, who was sentenced under the law in effect in 1975 which provided that a life sentence is 80 years. With credits, the defendant, who is now 60, has completed his sentence. The police and governor and hysterical souls express outrage and prey upon the public’s fears that murder and rapists will be running loose. Here is a link to but one story with the inmate’s photo: http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/6235442/. Look at this man, who is now age 60. Does he look like he is going on any crime sprees any time soon? We cannot predict with certainty, but just look at him. I don’t think he will do much except get his Social Security check and disappear if he is released.
The law is no longer in effect and has been repealed. So this law will affect how many people? Maybe a relative handful, compared to how many thousands of people we lock up. I don’t know the details of Mr. Bowden’s case as I have not read it, but I do know that too often defendants have less than stellar defenses and they lack the resources for defense counsel to do a really meaningful job. I also know that too many a wayward youth finds him or herself at the really wrong place at the wrong time and does something stupid which lands them in jail. However, that does not mean that these people are criminals or that they cannot go on to lead productive lives instead of being institutionalized for life. Mr. Bowden and the other inmates who have served their sentences should be released. And there are more pressing problems facing this state. Unemployment in this state is over ten percent (10%) (its probably higher as the government underestimates this number). There are no jobs to speak of here; two of my neighbors had to obtain work out of state and one will be relocating once the house here is sold. Yes, that is right - people are actually leaving this state to find work! The governor should stop manufacturing her phony outrage, stop gallivanting around the world and focus on the real problems facing this state instead of worrying about a handful of aged convicts.
On a final note, the 2010 elections will be soon upon us. Jockeying already has begun for Judge Brady’s seat as well as the seat held by Judge Calabria who will step down at the end of her term. And Judge Wynn and a Charlotte judge, Albert Diaz, are up for appointment to the Fourth Circuit. If Judge Wynn is appointed, there will be an opening for his seat, leaving two vacancies on the Court of Appeals. I, like Cindy Sheehan, have no plans to run for office, but as I have learned, never say never to anything; one never knows what life has in store for us and it remains to be seen as to what next year holds in store for me.
I probably will not write again before Thanksgiving, so let me wish everyone in advance a Happy Turkey Day!

Rachel Lea Hunter
http://www.rachelforjustice.com

Walt

November 9, 2009 - 4:47 am EST

Being a sane person the reporter concluded the amendment must tie into the rape victim somehow so assumed if it wasn't the criminal aspect it must be the civil ligation aspect. Unfortunately this reporter assumed wrong.

This amendment had nothing to do with criminal or civil litigation for rape victims. Certain items are not restricted to arbitration and full legal protections are already in place. The courts ruled that Halliburton could not arbitrate her claims of assault and battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent hiring, retention and supervision of employees involved in the assault, and false imprisonment.

For the Dems to make this a "Rape Victims" issue is disrespectful to rape victims and simply pimping these victims out to the trial lawyers (who crafted this amendment.) The bottom line is this amendment is designed to put more money in the Trial lawyers' pockets and thus more contributions to the DNC.

For a short explanation of this amendment check out this link.

http://blog.heritage.org/2009/10/16/the-truth-about-the-franken-amendmen...

eMail Updates

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Featured Ads

Search

Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us

News & Record Network Sites

User Tools

  • Social Networking
  • RSS
  • Share
  • Sign in to MyNR

Search