Why Do OC Congressional Reps. John Campbell and Dana Rohrabacher Hate Women?

D.R.
At the end of the day, at least veteran Orange County congressmen John Campbell and Dana Rohrabacher can say they don't hate all women. That's because they voted for one of two federal Violence Against Women acts last week, although not the one covering all women that's awaiting an anxious President Barack Obama's pen, but rather a defeated Republican alternative that would not have applied to lesbian, undocumented or Native American females.

Not surprisingly, Orange County's Democratic representatives--Loretta Sanchez (D-Garden Grove), her sister Linda Sanchez (D-Lakewood) and Alan Lowenthal (D-Long Beach)--voted against the GOP version and for the fully protective extension of the landmark 1994 legislation, which passed the House Thursday by a 286-138 vote. It also passed in the Senate and is now waiting on Obama's signature, which he has indicated he will give.

Surprisingly, Representative Darrell Issa (R-Vista) voted against the GOP version and for the one the Orange County Democrats supported. (All California members of Congress mentioned in this post are from districts that are completely or partially in Orange County.) It's surprising because Issa has voted against extending the Violence Against Women Act in the past.

The remaining GOP member from the Orange County delegation, Ed Royce (R-Fullerton), voted for both versions of the bill Thursday. 'Cause half pint's a lover! When it comes to his pals Campbell and Rohrabacher, you've got to ask: Why do they hate women?

No, they aren't among the 22 House members, Republicans all, who voted against both versions. Perhaps Campbell and Rohrabacher, who've remained silent on their votes, can pull a Michele Bachman. The Minnesota Republican tweeted to her followers that she voted for the "stronger" House version of the Violence Against Women Act, referring to the one that did not cover all women. Um . . . what? Guess it's stronger in the sense that batterers of lesbians, the undocumented and Native Americans would have still had the upper pimp hand.

J.C. III
On its bruised face, it is more surprising that relatively moderate, married, father-of-two Campbell, whose district is based in that land of enlightenment known as Irvine, would have been the one who voted against all women. After all, it's not like he's relatively wingnut, married, father-of-triplets Rohrabacher, who has been such a wild card over the years there's no predicting where he'll stand on anything. Well, anything that doesn't demonize brown people, that is.

Campbell voted to extend the Violence Against Women Act last year, which raises two questions: What the hell? And why is this law not permanent? Maybe it's being offered up as a gift for Scalia to poke fun at someday.

It's obvious some of Campbell's constituents wonder where he's coming from, given these comments left on his Facebook page:

John Troy: Congressman, you voted against the Violence Against Women Act? Is that true? Why would you do that? I can't believe it. I don't want you representing me.

Lynn Dalsing: Today, you had the opportunity to vote for the VAWA, and you chose not to. As a resident of California, your actions embarrass and disappoint me. I want to know why you voted to not protect women.

Melissa Avila: Congressman, as a woman and as one of your constituents, I am deeply disappointed that you chose to vote against VAWA today. You can expect a call from me tomorrow. I'm asking all the women in my family to call you, too (all in your district).

Simon Vakili: Congressman, would you please explain your stance on the Violence Against Women Act? I am curious as to why you deliberately acted against the best interests of 50 percent of your constituency. Actually, I'd like to amend that to 100 percent.

Looking at some of Campbell's other past votes, perhaps it is not that surprising after all.

My Voice Nation Help
7 comments
Mitchell_Young
Mitchell_Young topcommenter

BTW, by your 'logic', the lack of any 'violence against men' legislation says that all Congressional Representatives "hate" men.

Mitchell_Young
Mitchell_Young topcommenter

This is idiotic. Violence against women is illegal already. The vast majority of crimes of violence are enforced by state law. 


This federal legislation is pretty much all a show, setting up a few databases, a national hotline for battered women, etc. Both versions supported that. Lesbos were covered under the original bill. I suspect the illegal immigrant part is going to given a instant visa to every Mexican woman who claims her viejo beat her. Then she'll get 'legal' status and sponsor the very same Papi she claimed was roughing her up.

BobLoblawsLawBlog
BobLoblawsLawBlog

Except that it actually does cover men. So, whatever, right?

BobLoblawsLawBlog
BobLoblawsLawBlog

These types of legislation track, study and fund local efforts to handle and cut-down on instances of domestice violence. There is also the strange loophole that if a non-native american goes onto a reservation, rapes a woman and is able to leave the reservation, he cannot be tried in a non-reservation court and there is no way to extradite him to that reservation. You really ought to read the law befor dismissing it.

dreambones
dreambones

@BobLoblawsLawBlog 

- thank you for pointing that out to Mr. Young and kudos to Cottonwood; Mr. Young does seem to have some issues

Now Trending

Anaheim Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...