In recent days, we’ve reported on the GOP’s drive to repeal a Minnesota law that prevents pay discrimination against women in the public sector, and we broke the news that a Republican legislator in Georgia seeks to reclassify victims of rape, stalking, and domestic violence as “accusers.”

These are only a couple of the many recent indications that the GOP fails to understand women’s concerns and issues.

But the news for women on the state level isn’t all bad. In fact, during the General Assembly session in Virginia, Democrats have been shepherding legislation forward that will better protect women (and men) from people in their lives who intend to do them harm.

Democratic House Leader (and DLCC board member) Ward Armstrong sponsored a bill that could dramatically improve the effectiveness of protective orders. This legislation would allow judges to require Virginians who have violated a protective order to wear GPS tracking devices set to alert law enforcement and the victim if the violator comes too close to the victim. Giving judges this option will be a valuable means of ensuring the safety of victims who have been subjected to threatening or violent behavior even after a protective order has been issued. After all, protective orders are valuable safety tools, but ultimately they’re just pieces of paper; they won’t stop bullets, knives, or fists. Alerting victims to the proximity of a protective order violator will help ensure that bullets, knives,and fists never get close enough to do any damage.

Delegate David Toscano sponsored legislation to expand the availability and enforcement of protective orders. His bill removes the requirement for a criminal warrant before someone is eligible for a non-family abuse protective order, outlines specific consequences for violations, and prevents violators from receiving an entirely suspended sentence. According to Del. Toscano, the bill “represents a substantial step forward in providing greater protection to individuals in dating relationships from abuse.”

Both bills have passed the Virginia House of Delegates and await action in the state Senate.

Time will tell if the GOP’s apparent tendency towards losing touch with women’s concerns and issues will continue. Meanwhile, watch this space for more updates on what Democratic state legislators are doing to actively address those concerns and issues. 

U.S. House Republicans have received a great deal of attention over the past week since seeking to qualify the crime of rape with the term “forcible” in a high-profile piece of legislation. Such a distinction could create classes of rape victims, with “forcible rape” victims somehow being ordained as worse off than victims of statutory rape, date rape, rape by coercion or deception, rape of the disabled or mentally impaired… You get the picture.

But what if rape victims could no longer be referred to as “victims” at all? What if people who have endured this horrible – and already chronically underreported -- crime could only be called “accusers”?

Georgia Republican state Rep. Bobby Franklin (of gold-standard-wannabe fame) has introduced a bill to change the state’s criminal codes so that in “criminal law and criminal procedure” (read: in court), victims of rape, stalking, and family violence could only be referred to as “accusers” until the defendant has been convicted.

Burglary victims are still victims. Assault victims are still victims. Fraud victims are still victims. But if you have the misfortune to suffer a rape, or if you are beaten by a domestic partner, or if you are stalked, Rep. Franklin doesn’t think you’ve been victimized. He says you’re an accuser until the courts have determined otherwise.

To diminish a victim’s ordeal by branding him/her an accuser essentially questions whether the crime committed against the victim is a crime at all. Robbery, assault, and fraud are all real crimes with real victims, the Republican asserts with this bill.

Rep. Franklin surely is aware that the crimes for which he believes there are no victims are disproportionately committed against women—and are disproportionately committed by men.

When there’s violence against women involved, the rights of the accused clearly are more important to Rep. Franklin than the rights of the victim.

But if there’s no such thing as a victim in cases of rape, stalking, and domestic violence, he may think there’s no need to for him to be concerned with their rights, anyway.

See if you can spot the logical fallacy in GOP state Rep. Frank McNulty’s argument about why it’s OK that so many of his fellow GOP legislative nominees have violent arrest records (including one nominee, Clint Webster, arrested for threatening to kill his ex-wife and shooting at her):

"You're seeing normal people stepping up and running for office," McNulty said. "You see folks who are ordinary people, who face the real challenges that families in Colorado face and that have the real problems that people in Colorado have." (…)

Now that he has the fuller story, McNulty doesn't think it will be devastating to Webster's campaign. "Even though you have folks with blemishes on their record, some more serious than others, this is something people should recognize as being a slice of Colorado," McNulty said. "These are honest, everyday folks who want to go out and serve their neighbors in the state legislature."

See? All these candidates are just “a slice of Colorado!”

So in other words, McNulty is arguing that because:
A.) state legislators should represent the people in their state, and
B.) some people in Colorado have shot at or otherwise tried to kill their ex-spouses;
Therefore:
C.) Colorado should elect a few legislators who’ve tried to kill their ex-spouses.

Presumably, McNulty would use the same argument to defend other GOP nominees who’ve been arrested for assault, domestic violence, perjury, and assaulting a police officer (among many, many others).

Of course, we all know what McNulty wanted to say but couldn’t: It's OK if You're a Republican (IOKIYAR).

There’s no place for this.

Dan Manning, a Democratic military veteran running for Kansas’ 91st State House seat (based in Wichita), has reported receiving a death threat on his front door.

Manning was discharged from the military under the infamous Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy, and while his sexuality has not been a focus of his campaign, the motivations of the coward who left the threatening letter were plain:

Dan’s opponent is long-time incumbent Brenda Landwehr. Landwehr, a notorious far-right conservative, has been a vocal opponent of equal rights for gay, lesbian and transgendered Kansans. Since February, she has used Dan’s sexual orientation to stir up her constituent. She has gone so far as to use language that Dan was told was “too offensive” to repeat.

This weekend, the homophobia and name-calling took a dangerous and criminal turn.

Dan arrived home from work on Saturday to find a death threat attached to his front door. Crudely cut from newspaper headlines was a crass note that read:

“DISTRICT 91 Democrat Dan N. Manning, 29, production supervisor, manningforkansas.com”
“2010 State House Election”
“Will DIE”
“FaGIT”
“Kill”
“HOMO”
“MURDER”
“Head OFF”

[hat-tip Kansas Equality Coalition]

Manning has focused much of his campaign on job creation, education, and renewable energy. And as he explained to Think Progress (which has posted a copy of the letter), Manning does not believe his opponent or her campaign is behind the threat. He spoke out about the incident in an interview with KAKE News in Wichita:

["]Running as a gay man in Kansas and a Democrat, as well, I expected there would be some intimidation, some threats, but nothing I don't think ever really prepares you for that," he said. "It was still quite shocking."

The threats were concocted using newspaper or magazine copy of letters cut out and glued in formation to spell out certain words.

"I think it's important for people to know that there is still hate and bigotry alive and well in this country," Manning explained. "When something like this happens, I think it's important to call it for what it is."

Wichita police are investigating.

You might remember Republican State Sen. Dennis Nolan of Nevada from last week, when he was caught on tape allegedly offering to bribe the witness in a rape trial to change her story. (You can listen to the audio here.)

Well, this story just got much, much uglier. Sen. Nolan has now posted an open letter on his campaign website claiming he feels “compelled to believe the sex was consensual” because the 16-year-old victim had been “very sexually active” prior to the rape, and because (“as a side note,” he says) 42% of Nevada teenagers have been sexually active before age 16.

Just to reiterate, this is a man whose job it is to write laws, including the laws used to prosecute sexual assault. This man has no business serving in any public office – he needs to resign, immediately.

This is the sort of document that eventually gets scrubbed from a campaign website, so we’ll quote from the screen-shots we took:

As a side note in Nevada, approximately 42% of all teens ages 12-16, admit to having had intercourse, about 25% of them admit to having multiple partners.(Council of Chief of State Schools Officers), Is it right? NO! Is it right for adults to engage in sex with minors? NO! But sadly, it is happening, and that’s the fact.

Knowing this young lady, reading the case and observing her behavior before and after the incident, I am compelled to believe the sex was consensual. She was very sexually active and, according to court records, had an abortion just two weeks prior to the alleged sexual assault (this is now public record). Was it right? NO!

Nolan also lashes out against the victim’s father, accusing him of being a pedophile:

My call to the “alleged” victim’s sister, Mr. Lawes' ex-wife, who is an acquaintance, was made only after I received information that both young women were abused as children by their father and that he may be continuing to “control them” as abusers often do. The possibility that the very person publicly accusing me of “defending a SEX OFFENDER, being FRIENDS with a RAPIST “ may himself have been or may be an abuser, is maddening.

And as for the answering machine message – the one where he tells a witness from the case that it would be “very financially beneficial" to change her story? Nolan has an explanation for that too:

I made two calls to the woman pleading with her to talk to me and offering to assist in getting the help she needed to stand up to her father and regain custody of her children. They went unanswered, I left a third message implying “someone” could compensate her if she would tell the truth “about what was going on”. The Nevada Legislative Counsel Bureau Legal Division issued a written legal opinion which stated clearly, this did not constitute “attempted bribery”! These allegations are just plain lies!

Clearly. Nolan’s logic is that he offered someone else’s money, therefore it couldn’t have been a bribe. Just like this girl could not have been raped because some other teenage girls are sexually active. And just like being sexually active even once means that all future sexual activity is consensual.

This kind of disgusting rhetoric – especially coming from an elected official – is exactly why sexual assault is one of the most underreported crimes in the country. Victims have to worry about whether they’ll be believed at all and whether their reputations will be dragged through the mud by people like Dennis Nolan.

We already thought Nolan had gone too far, but now we’re convinced. He needs to resign - click here to add your name to our petition.

CHECK THE FACTS – read Sen. Nolan’s letter for yourself:

Nolan Letter page 1 – 06-04-2010
Nolan Letter page 2 – 06-04-2010

Something in the water must be affecting Republican primaries in Nevada. Hot on the heels of the “chickens for checkups” incident roiling the U.S. Senate race, an incumbent State Senator has been caught on tape allegedly offering to bribe the parents of a rape victim in an effort to protect the man who was convicted in the case:

A Las Vegas woman said Thursday that state Sen. Dennis Nolan showed signs of "complete insanity" by offering her money if she would tell the truth about a rape involving her ex-husband and sister. (…)

In the message, he talks about making it "very financially beneficial" if Lawes would tell the truth about the 2008 court case in which her then-husband, Gordon Lawes, now 29, was convicted of raping her then 16-year-old sister. Gordon Lawes received a prison sentence of at least 10 years.

Amazingly, the audio recording of Nolan allegedly offering the bribe and engaging in possible witness tampering was not obtained through any special efforts. Nolan left the message himself on the Lawes family’s answering machine. And, so there’s no doubt about the content and context of that message, you can listen for yourself below:

Nolan served as a character witness at the defendant’s trial, and Nolan still makes the argument today that the 16-year-old girl was not raped at all because (he claims) she consented and then failed to tell the truth at trial (16 is the age of consent in Nevada). The girl’s family was understandably outraged by the claim:

[Tim] Anderson said that his daughter "was passed out drunk when Gordon raped her. She couldn't consent to anything."

Jaime Lawes said Thursday that Nolan's allegations are ridiculous.

"I stated the truth on the witness stand," Lawes said. "My ex-husband Gordon confessed to the rape. I stand by my story because in fact a rape took place."

Amazingly, despite a flood of calls from Republican voters angry about Nolan's conduct, the Republican Party of Nevada is refusing to call for his resignation or withdrawal from his re-election bid. Chairman Mark Amodei would only go so far as to say "Dennis Nolan needs to do some soul searching."

We think he needs to do more than soul-searching. We think he needs to resign, immediately. If you agree, click here to add your voice to the call.

Some Republican legislators in Oklahoma have decided to mark next week’s 15th anniversary of the infamous Oklahoma City bombing… by teaming up with local Tea Party extremists to form a right-wing paramilitary militia to guard Oklahoma “from an overreaching federal government."

No, really:

Thus far, the discussions have been exploratory. Even the proponents say they don't know how an armed force would be organized nor how a state-based militia could block federal mandates. Critics also asserted that the force could inflame extremism, and that the National Guard already provides for the state's military needs.

"Have they heard of the Oklahoma City bombing?" said Joseph Thai, a constitutional law professor at the University of Oklahoma. The state observes the 15th anniversary of the anti-government attack on Monday. Such actions could "throw fuel in the fire of radicals," he said.

Militia organizers are sending out promotional materials with headlines like “Buy more guns, more bullets,” but they insist that their militia would not plot to attack (i.e. murder) police officers or federal employees. Left unsaid, of course, is how exactly they plan to use guns to defend against the federal government.

Amazingly, Republican legislators like State Sen. Randy Brogdon and State Rep. Charles Key are backing the anti-government militias and even offering to promote them through the legislature.

The Iowa and Arizona Senates both took action recently to protect their states’ citizens from domestic violence, as well as to prevent violence from escalating to tragedy.

Iowa’s SF 2357, which passed on a bipartisan 36-11 vote, takes the commonsense step of prohibiting individuals with protective orders or criminal convictions against them for domestic abuse from possessing firearms. As the Democratic Caucus explains, support for this bill is based on the facts surrounding domestic violence:

Since 1995, guns have been used in more than half of all Iowa murders involving domestic abuse. Fifty-four percent of women killed by an intimate partner were shot; 50 percent of men killed by an intimate partner were shot; and 57 percent of children and bystanders killed in domestic violence attacks were shot.

Meanwhile, Arizona Senate Democrats unanimously supported two new bills aimed at making domestic violence easier to prosecute:

SB 1087, which passed 20-8, would add homicide, manslaughter, animal cruelty and sexual assault to the list of crimes that when committed against a family member or intimate partner count as domestic violence.

Given the shameful example of Republican legislators in other states on similar issues recently, it should come as no surprise that all eight of the “no” votes on this bill were cast by Republicans and included both the Senate President and the Republican Majority Leader.

A separate bill approved on the same day would upgrade the choking of a partner to a Class 4 felony. This is an important change for policymakers fighting to end the tragic outcomes that so often follow domestic violence:

[E]xperts consider choking, which can render the victim unconscious in 10 seconds, to be a serious risk factor for escalation to homicide...

Nearly half of female homicide and attempted homicide victims were choked in the past year by their male partner, according to an article in the Journal of Emergency Medicine.

All bills now move on to their respective State Houses for consideration.

It’s rare for us to talk about former (rather than current) legislators – mainly because the 7000+ sitting legislators actually get to pass laws. But this story about a Republican in South Dakota is just too irredeemably weird:

A former South Dakota lawmaker convicted of raping his two foster daughters has sent news organizations what he claims is a copyright notice that seeks to prevent the use of his name without his consent.

A letter and an accompanying document labeled "Common Law Copyright Notice" said former state Rep. Ted Alvin Klaudt is reserving a common-law copyright of a trade name or trademark for his name. It said no one can use his name without his consent, and anyone who does would owe him $500,000.

Klaudt was convicted in 2007 on four counts of second-degree rape for touching his teenage foster daughters' breasts and genitals in phony examinations he said could help them sell their eggs to infertile couples. He was sentenced to 44 years in prison for rape and 10 more years after pleading guilty to two counts of witness tampering.

The rapes occurred in 2005 and 2006, while Klaudt was still in office. He later lost a close State Senate race by 566 votes to Democrat Ryan Maher, whose constituents must have breathed a huge sigh of relief later. Our best guess is that Klaudt’s “copyright” letters are just a bizarre effort to get attention, but then again we are talking about a man who thought this was a compelling argument:

His lawyer had argued in the appeal that while Klaudt's actions were terrible, they did not amount to rape because the girls gave their consent in the belief they could make money by donating eggs to infertile couples.

Seriously – where do the Republicans find these people?

When former Missouri Republican House Speaker Rod Jetton was arrested on assault charges last week, the probable cause document left out a key detail from the police incident report: the victim told police she never consented to sexual intercourse, violent or otherwise, and in fact told Jetton “no” before she became incapacitated.

That omission led early media reports (including those cited here at DLCC.org) to describe the incident as an “S&M session gone wrong,” but the official police incident report describes a much more brutal and unexpected alleged assault by Mr. Jetton:

[WOMAN] stated she and Mr. jetton had been friends for several years. She stated she had not seen or talked to him in several years and they had never been in a relationship. [WOMAN] stated Mr. Jetton had been texting her and he wanted to stop by her residence on 11/15/2009 (…)

[WOMAN] stated she remembered putting the movie "Haunting in Connecticut" in the DVD player at approximately 2300 hours. They began to watch the movie and Mr. Jetton attempted to remove her pants and she told him “no”.

[WOMAN] stated the next thing she remembered, she was on the floor in the living room and Mr. Jetton was trying to restrain both of her hands with what appeared to be a leather belt. She stated she was very groggy and unable to speak but was able to pull her hands free from the restraint. She stated at this point, Mr. Jetton began to strike her on the left side of her face with an open hand. She stated after the fourth blow to the left side of her face, she began to see stars and blacked out.

The report, obtained through a public records request by the liberal blog Fired Up! Missouri, obviously describes an even more serious incident than the one previously outlined in earlier media accounts.

Details continue to emerge, and obviously the complete story is not yet known.