George Allen Votes Against Women
27 October 2006 12:00 pm by Taylor Marsh
George Allen Votes Against Women –updated–
cross-posted on Huffington Post
UPDATE (2:30 p.m.): Yesterday, Josh Marshall asked about George Allen's divorce records, which have been kept under wraps and away from inquiring minds. Well, they're not anymore. Wonder what wingnut CNS will say about that when it breaks?
Update II: A clue might be in Ryan Lizza's recent piece on Mark Warner that cites a story that had been \”making the rounds\” about a 2008 presidential contender who \”once spit on his wife.\” That rumor was also about Allen.
This isn't fiction. It's George Allen's votes against women. Why would a man
of good conscience vote against aiding victims of sexual assault?
2004: Allen Voted Against Expanding The Family And Medical Leave
Act To Cover Victims of Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault. In
2004, Allen voted against a proposal that would expand the Family and Medical
Leave Act to allow victims of domestic violence and sexual assault to take
leave from work for up to 30 days. It also would allow victims of domestic
violence, stalking or sexual assault to receive unemployment insurance if
they have lost their job as a result. The American Association of University
Women was for the amendment. [HR 1997, Vote 62, 3/25/04, Failed 46-53, D:
44-3, R: 1-50, I: 1-0]
1988: Allen Opposes Rights of Women Sexually Assaulted in the Workplace. Allen
voted against legislation to allow a woman who was sexually assaulted in the
workplace to sue her attacker rather than be limited to benefits under workers'
compensation. He was one of just twenty members of the House who apparently
believe that sexual assault in the workplace is just another job hazard. [HB
137, 1988, passed 79-20]1988: Allen Opposes Rights of Women Sexually Assaulted in the Workplace.
Allen voted against legislation to allow a woman who was sexually assaulted
in the workplace to sue her attacker rather than be limited to benefits under
workers' compensation. He was one of just twenty members of the House who
apparently believe that sexual assault in the workplace is just another job
hazard. [HB 137, 1988, passed 79-20]George Allen
Votes Against Victims of Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence
It's bad enough that Republicans want to tell us what to do with our own bodies.
It's heinous Republicans also want to bar poor women from reproductive counseling,
because of some philosophy that the feds shouldn't fund it. Tough luck that
you're poor, babe, try abstinence. But it's down right criminal the lengths
to which Republicans like George Allen will go to harbor the people who target,
assault and demean women, especially in the workplace, where the consequences
of speaking out could cause hardship of life threatening proportions.
When a woman has been a victim of sexual assault, harassment or stalking, it
is the most traumatic event of her life. It takes time to recover. Why would
a man not support policies that help a woman to just that?
Has Allen ever asked an assault victim how it feels? Or doesn't he
care?
This isn't some fantasy from which we will wake up on November 8th. It's real
life and nothing is more important than getting rid of anyone who votes against
women's interests, especially victims of assault.
George Allen is the only incumbent running with a record of voting
against women's interests, including the victims of sexual assault. Voting against
helping women recover from sexual assault? Voting against expanding the Family
and Medical Leave Act to include sexual assault victims? Voting against allowing
a woman to sue her attacker? What kind of man does that?
Why would anyone do that? Because it's too expensive to help women? Because
taxpayers shouldn't help women; let them do it themselves? Because it will cost
his big business cronies money and insurance hikes? BINGO. So much for the common good.
So much for helping victims of sexual assault.
Women can't afford to have George Allen sent back to the Senate. Virginia,
it's up to you.
