I went out to our local congresswoman at the same time I asked our two United States Senators about their silence on the issue of congressional sexual assault/harassment... and their lack of effort in exposing the names of those who are on the list of 260+ Congress Members who used taxpayer funds to settle their cases. I sent it via email roughly 3+ weeks ago.
I received the following response from Herrera's office... which, unlike Cantwell's typical effort of completely ignoring the constituent, at least mentions the thrust of the subject I wrote her about.
Before you read this letter, I need to explain the worthless reference to "co-sponsoring" a bill, either in Congress or in the Legislature.
Bills only have one actual sponsor. Typically, the sponsor is both the one who came up with the idea in question, or, for reasons of seniority, positioning, or political power (and thus, an increased chance of actually securing a bill's passage) is given the bill to run by the actual author of the bill. That person then signs as "Number Two" on the list... bathroom references notwithstanding.
Those in the legislative world will know when the sponsor is the actual sponsor; those outside; mainly, the public, typically have no clue.
In the seven years Herrera has been in Congress, she has passed a single bill; a fisheries bill cosponsored by Sen. Cantwell in the Senate, an extension of an already existing fisheries law concerning crabs that was signed and passed into law by the, to her, despised President Trump. No other bill has come up on my search. She has, on occasion, amended bills of others... that is, added her ideas to the efforts of others and those typically small changes have, occasionally, been signed into law.
But "co-sponsorship" of a bill, which she has always heavily relied upon since she first parachuted back in the region some 10 years ago at the behest of her boss, Cathy McMorris, to run against Brian Baird, is essentially meaningless. It gives the cosponsor the ability to fool constituents into thinking her name on a bill makes... or made...any difference.
It doesn't. "Cosponsoring" a bill means getting your name on it. Period.
In this instance, Herrera's letter indicates as I suspected: that outside of adding her name to a few bills, she has... and had... done absolutely nothing about this pervasive problem that was going on long before she got there as a congresswoman. Essentially, she's been there for the better part of 7 years, has been well aware of this issue long before she arrived as a Member of Congress because she knew about it, even when she was Cathy McMorris's coffee fetcher.
And in all that time... she did nothing.
She's not doing a whole hell of lot now, either.
Giving credit where due, at least some effort was made to mention the issues I had contacted her about, unlike Cantwell.
Murray has yet to be heard from.
So, what's missing from all of this?
An explanation as to why she KNEW this was going on... but remained SILENT.
Where've you been the past 7 years? Why weren't you doing this from the moment you arrived? What have you been doing instead?
That's a rhetorical question. We already know the answer.
Nothing.
"Will be working" seems to me to infer she's kinda not been doing anything about this in the past. Kinda future tense.
Also missing is any effort on her part to expose the 260 names of the Members of Congress who have used taxpayer funds to settle with their victims.
It's bad enough that this happened at all. But the idea that those guilty of this kind of activity can then turn around and use OUR money to buy their way out of it?
These unfortunate women were not the only victims.
So are we.
I received the following response from Herrera's office... which, unlike Cantwell's typical effort of completely ignoring the constituent, at least mentions the thrust of the subject I wrote her about.
Before you read this letter, I need to explain the worthless reference to "co-sponsoring" a bill, either in Congress or in the Legislature.
Bills only have one actual sponsor. Typically, the sponsor is both the one who came up with the idea in question, or, for reasons of seniority, positioning, or political power (and thus, an increased chance of actually securing a bill's passage) is given the bill to run by the actual author of the bill. That person then signs as "Number Two" on the list... bathroom references notwithstanding.
Those in the legislative world will know when the sponsor is the actual sponsor; those outside; mainly, the public, typically have no clue.
In the seven years Herrera has been in Congress, she has passed a single bill; a fisheries bill cosponsored by Sen. Cantwell in the Senate, an extension of an already existing fisheries law concerning crabs that was signed and passed into law by the, to her, despised President Trump. No other bill has come up on my search. She has, on occasion, amended bills of others... that is, added her ideas to the efforts of others and those typically small changes have, occasionally, been signed into law.
But "co-sponsorship" of a bill, which she has always heavily relied upon since she first parachuted back in the region some 10 years ago at the behest of her boss, Cathy McMorris, to run against Brian Baird, is essentially meaningless. It gives the cosponsor the ability to fool constituents into thinking her name on a bill makes... or made...any difference.
It doesn't. "Cosponsoring" a bill means getting your name on it. Period.
In this instance, Herrera's letter indicates as I suspected: that outside of adding her name to a few bills, she has... and had... done absolutely nothing about this pervasive problem that was going on long before she got there as a congresswoman. Essentially, she's been there for the better part of 7 years, has been well aware of this issue long before she arrived as a Member of Congress because she knew about it, even when she was Cathy McMorris's coffee fetcher.
And in all that time... she did nothing.
She's not doing a whole hell of lot now, either.
Jaime Herrera Beutler 3rd District, Southwest Washington Committee on Appropriations
Subcommittee on Energy and Water
Development, and Related Agencies Subcommittee on labor health and human services, education and related agencies Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government |
|
1107 Longworth HOB
Washington, DC 20515 (202) 225-3536 General O.O. Howard House 750 Anderson Street, Suite B Vancouver, WA 98661 (360) 695-6292 WWW.JHB.HOUSE.GOV |
||
December 11, 2017 |
||||
Mr. Kelly Hinton
PO Box 821761
Vancouver, WA 98682-0041
Dear Mr. Hinton,
Thank you for contacting me about
the need for Congress to more strongly confront and prevent sexual
harassment. It is an honor to represent the people of Southwest Washington,
and I appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts with me.
It is high time we reform the
process for handling sexual harassment here in Congress from one that
protects harassers at the expense of taxpayers to one that protects
individuals who report sexual harassment and deters this kind of unacceptable
conduct. Recent reports have revealed that more than $17 million has
been paid out in taxpayer funded settlements. Though not all of that
money went to settle sexual harassment cases in the halls of Congress, I
don't believe another dollar of public money should be used for this purpose.
Furthermore, it's time to reform the process for handling sexual harassment
claims and create a much stronger deterrent for this kind of behavior.
Another case will be one too many.
I have cosponsored multiple
pieces of legislation that would instill such accountability and prevention
in Congress. One bill I cosponsored is the Member and Employee
Training and Oversight On Congress Act. This bill would prohibit
requiring a confidentiality agreement as a condition for filing a formal
complaint; and provide legal counseling to complainants, allowing targets of
harassment to feel safe and supported enough to report sexual abuse. In
addition, Members who settle a claim as the harasser would be required to
repay taxpayers for amount of the settlement -- and that settlement would be
made public. It would also require annual sexual harassment training for all
Members and staff.
In addition, I am a cosponsor of
the Congressional Accountability and Hush Fund Elimination Act. This
legislation aims to protect taxpayers by making congressional settlement data
public and prohibiting the use of tax dollars to cover-up sexual harassment
or assault. This bill would take an additional step by requiring Members of
Congress and staff to pay back the taxpayer money they used in settlements -
with interest - for any such incident that has taken place since the
enactment after the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995. This repayment
must be made regardless of whether the staff member of Representative is
currently serving in Congress.
Please know that as your federal
representative, I will be working to ensure all elected officials and
congressional employees are held to the highest ethical standards.
Thank you again for contacting me
on this important issue. I invite you to visit my website at www.jhb.house.gov for
additional information or to sign up to be kept up to date on these issues.
Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of assistance.
|
||||
|
||||
Giving credit where due, at least some effort was made to mention the issues I had contacted her about, unlike Cantwell.
Murray has yet to be heard from.
So, what's missing from all of this?
An explanation as to why she KNEW this was going on... but remained SILENT.
Please know that as your federal representative, I will be working to ensure all elected officials and congressional employees are held to the highest ethical standards.Really?
Where've you been the past 7 years? Why weren't you doing this from the moment you arrived? What have you been doing instead?
That's a rhetorical question. We already know the answer.
Nothing.
"Will be working" seems to me to infer she's kinda not been doing anything about this in the past. Kinda future tense.
Also missing is any effort on her part to expose the 260 names of the Members of Congress who have used taxpayer funds to settle with their victims.
It's bad enough that this happened at all. But the idea that those guilty of this kind of activity can then turn around and use OUR money to buy their way out of it?
These unfortunate women were not the only victims.
So are we.
No comments:
Post a Comment