Family Research Council: "Real abuse" is cost of VAWA to taxpayers

The social conservative group is opposed to the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act

Published February 6, 2013 10:55PM (EST)

Phyllis Schlafly
Phyllis Schlafly

The socially conservative Family Research Council asked supporters to help it oppose the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act because, the group says, the "real abuse" is how much it will waste taxpayer dollars.

In an email alert on Monday, the FRC decried the VAWA ("which, ironically, is supported by the same administration that wants to put women in front-line combat!") as an "abuse of taxpayer dollars" that "does more to promote a radical agenda than it does to help women."

The email quoted conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly, who also opposes VAWA. "In its 17 years of operation," Schlafly wrote on, VAWA "has done little or no good for real victims of domestic violence, while its funds have been used to fill feminist coffers and to lobby for feminist objectives and laws. Although every spending bill should be subject to rigorous auditing procedures in order to curb waste and fraud, VAWA has somehow ducked accountability for the [$660 million] a year it doles out to radical feminist organizations."

From the email, via Right Wing Watch: "Among the bill's most egregious parts is a provision that would ban funds to grantees who may have religious objections to homosexuality--even if no documented case of refused services has been found. It also includes special assistance for homosexual victims."

"Although [Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.] promises to have a 60-vote block of support, FRC has warned the Senate that we will be scoring the vote. You can help by contacting your Senators and urging them to vote against VAWA and end the real abuse of taxpayer dollars," the email says.

On Monday, the Senate voted 85-8 to take up VAWA, which is expected to pass with bipartisan support sometime this week. The bill expired in September 2011, and repeatedly stalled again last year because of House Republican objections to new provisions that expand protections for same-sex couples, illegal immigrants and Native American women.

By Jillian Rayfield

Jillian Rayfield is an Assistant News Editor for Salon, focusing on politics. Follow her on Twitter at @jillrayfield or email her at

MORE FROM Jillian Rayfield

Related Topics ------------------------------------------

Domestic Violence Family Research Council Patrick Leahy Senate Violence Against Women Act