tct main 2010
 
 Web  TheCypressTimes  
 
MCCAUL: DEMOCRATS EXPLOIT TROOPS AS COVER TO PASS HATE CRIMES LEGISLATION

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Congressman Michael McCaul (R-TX 10), Ranking Member of the Homeland Security Intelligence Subcommittee, released the following statement regarding H.R. 2647, the National Defense Authorization Act Conference Report:

“It is unprecedented to attach social policy legislation to a DOD authorization bill. This social agenda has nothing to do with the military. The Democrats’ inclusion of hate crimes language is pure exploitation of our soldiers, marines, sailors and airmen. It is an insult to men and women who risk their lives on the battlefield defending our freedoms and it has no place in a Defense Authorization bill that gives pay raises to our troops, keeps their healthcare costs from rising and makes more resources available for combat.

“The hate crimes legislation wrongly inserted in this bill places a higher value on crimes committed against individuals even perceived to be gays or lesbians. As a former prosecutor I am opposed to elevating anyone’s status under the law.

“Since I entered Congress I am proud that I have consistently voted to put every available resource into the hands of our military. But I will not vote to allow our troops to be used as pawns to bait Republicans into voting for a key piece of the liberal agenda Democrats otherwise would not have the votes to pass. Mine is one principled Republican vote they didn’t get.”

Rep. McCaul tried to have hate crimes language removed from the conference report. He signed a letter (full letter below) to President Obama saying he would have voted in favor of the bill had the hate crimes language not been included.

John Brieden, a veterans’ advocate who has held numerous veterans’ leadership posts, released this statement in support of Rep. McCaul’s vote:

“An astute observer has to understand people attach bad things to good bills. On a consistent basis Congressman McCaul has supported the troops and the DOD budget and pay raises and I support his vote today.”

The DOD authorization bill passed the House with 281 votes, evidence of the rare partisanship injected into a defense spending bill. Prior to today, 359 votes had been the low water mark for support of a defense authorization bill since 9/11.

Representative McCaul's Letter to the President

October 8, 2009

President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President:

We write today to express our strong opposition to the “hate crimes” provisions that have been attached to H.R. 2647, the National Defense Authorization Act Conference Report for Fiscal Year 2010.

Each of us takes very seriously the responsibility to ensure the men and women who volunteer to serve in our Armed Forces have the resources they need to defend this nation. Using our troops to pass divisive social policy does a profound disservice to them, this institution, and the constituents we serve.

Our objections to the federal criminalization of “hate crimes” are well-known because we have had the opportunity to air them as part of the regular legislative process. That is how this legislation should continue to be considered, not on the backs of members of our Armed Forces. They – and their families – deserve better.

House Republicans believe that all violent crimes are unacceptable, regardless of the status of the victims, and should be firmly punished. Although this legislation purports to assist state and local efforts to enforce existing laws, it represents a thinly veiled attack on federalism.

What's more, we cannot help but note that these provisions violate our nation's founding principles, which the members of our Armed Forces put their lives on the line every day to protect. It is these same principles each of us has sworn an oath to uphold.

To that end, had these “hate crimes” provisions not been included, we would have voted to support final passage of H.R. 2647.

Sincerely,

Post A Comment
Comments 1 comments for this article
Added: October 11, 2009. 03:12 PM CST
Judy Shepard Hypocrite
This bill is named after Matthew Shepard, who according to ABC PrimeTime died in a robbery gone bad. His mother Judy Shepard has pushed this bill. Now; Can someone ask Judy Shepard this question: Why is it that Judy Shepard only will criticize hate-crimes committed by people who are not wealthy? For example, why not criticize the Saudi government? The Saudi government institutionalizes hate against other religious groups and against gays. To be gay in Saudi Arabia you risk arrest, imprisonment, torture and a public beheading. You can't get much more of a perfect example of a hate crime with Saudi Arabia. Yet, Judy Shepard's husband worked as an oil man for the Saudi government and handsome amounts of money. Could this have something to do with Judy Shepard's silence?There seems to be a pattern here with Judy Shepard of hypocrisy. Is this Judy Shepard's message? hate crimes are bad unless you offer lots of cash to Judy Shepard or to someone or something associated with her? Something to ask Judy Shepard at her next public appearance.
Judy Shepard says she is against hate-crimes, but is she really? Certainly those committed against her family, but how about those committed against others? Well the record shows she is not so ill disposed. Shepard says she lives in Saudi Arabia and her husband pulls in good money from the Saudi government in oil. But wait, doesn't the Saudi government commit hate crimes all the time against women (stoning them for talking to men), against non-Muslims (beheading those trying to convert Christianity) and against gays (arresting, torturing, imprisoning and beheading them). Where is Shepard's outrage then? Perhaps Shepard's entire message is this: hate crimes are bad unless the hate crime criminal is loaded with
Anonymous
Reader Login
Username:
Password:
 Save Login?
Free Sign-up
Forgot Password?
Reader Control Panel
Our Newest Articles