Rape Kit Costs and the GOP Ticket.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2008-09-11 06:54pm

So, a little while ago, it came out that Wasilla, the city Palin was mayor of, was charging rape victims for their rape kits to be done. I hadn't put it in the Palin thread because there was no direct evidence showing it was her decision. The closest was a guy she hired into the local government saying they didn't want to put that burden on the taxpayer.

But there are those who look for juxtapositions between McCain and Palin, like McCain speeches railing against Palin-supported earmarks. And today, we find this. This is just a set of Senate Vote records on a bill.

Roll call lists:

First Vote on bill. Second vote on bill. Appropriating funding for it all.

Okay, so what's this got to do with the whacky Wasilla law I brought up? From the law's text..

Link

SEC. 2005. RAPE EXAM PAYMENTS.

`(a) RESTRICTION OF FUNDS-

`(1) IN GENERAL- A State, Indian tribal government, or unit of local government, shall not be entitled to funds under this part unless the State, Indian tribal government, unit of local government, or another governmental entity incurs the full out-of-pocket cost of forensic medical exams described in subsection (b) for victims of sexual assault.

`(2) REDISTRIBUTION- Funds withheld from a State or unit of local government under paragraph (1) shall be distributed to other States or units of local government pro rata. Funds withheld from an Indian tribal government under paragraph (1) shall be distributed to other Indian tribal governments pro rata.

`(b) MEDICAL COSTS- A State, Indian tribal government, or unit of local government shall be deemed to incur the full out-of-pocket cost of forensic medical exams for victims of sexual assault if any government entity--

`(1) provides such exams to victims free of charge to the victim;

`(2) arranges for victims to obtain such exams free of charge to the victims; or

`(3) reimburses victims for the cost of such exams if--

`(A) the reimbursement covers the full cost of such exams, without any deductible requirement or limit on the amount of a reimbursement;

`(B) the reimbursing governmental entity permits victims to apply for reimbursement for not less than one year from the date of the exam;

`(C) the reimbursing governmental entity provides reimbursement not later than 90 days after written notification of the victim's expense; and

`(D) the State, Indian tribal government, unit of local government, or reimbursing governmental entity provides information at the time of the exam to all victims, including victims with limited or no English proficiency, regarding how to obtain reimbursement.

They seem together on this issue..

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2008-09-11 07:00pm

How common is this 'victim pays' practice in the US?

Kanastrous · Post by **Kanastrous** » 2008-09-11 07:02pm

This is the first example of which I have heard.

I suspect that it's uncommon.

Darksider · Post by **Darksider** » 2008-09-11 07:06pm

let me jump in before the dogpile so it's not just a me-too post and say that making the victim pay for their own rape kit is morally reprehensible.

People shouldn't have to pay out of pocket to find their own rapists. It's not like they made a damn choice to get raped in the first place.

hey chewie. Is this another one of those "moral choices" you keep insinuating MCcain and Palin are going to make?

Kanastrous · Post by **Kanastrous** » 2008-09-11 07:09pm

Well, more to the point catching rapists and removing them from circulation is necessary for the common good. So expecting a rape victim to cover the costs of forensics that will hopefully help protect the public from a criminal by catching him and putting him away, makes no more sense than charging victims for the resources necessary to investigate burglaries, armed robberies, aggravated assaults, attempted murders, or any other sort of violent crime.

The Spartan · Post by **The Spartan** » 2008-09-11 07:37pm

Darksider wrote:People shouldn't have to pay out of pocket to find their own rapists. It's not like they made a damn choice to get raped in the first place.

You're forgetting that a large number of conservatards think that if a woman is raped then it's her fault for being in a position to get raped in the first place.

Yes, it's reprehensible, but, well, there you are.

Darksider · Post by **Darksider** » 2008-09-11 07:43pm

The Spartan wrote: You're forgetting that a large number of conservatards think that if a woman is raped then it's her fault for being in a position to get raped in the first place.

Yes, it's reprehensible, but, well, there you are.

quite frankly I sometimes wish that all the conservotards that spewed that bullshit would get raped at least once, just to experience what it's really like.

Does that make me a horrible person?

The Spartan · Post by **The Spartan** » 2008-09-11 07:46pm

Darksider wrote:
The Spartan wrote: You're forgetting that a large number of conservatards think that if a woman is raped then it's her fault for being in a position to get raped in the first place.

Yes, it's reprehensible, but, well, there you are.
quite frankly I sometimes wish that all the conservotards that spewed that bullshit would get raped at least once, just to experience what it's really like.

Does that make me a horrible person?

I have two friends, one a very close friend, who have had to go through that, so I'm not easily able to be rational about this subject and am not the best person to ask that question.

Kanastrous · Post by **Kanastrous** » 2008-09-11 07:47pm

Darksider wrote:
Does that make me a horrible person?

Not by my standards.

It's not too unusual for me to find myself wishing for someone who styles themselves an authority on some horrible experience, actually have to experience it.

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2008-09-11 07:50pm

The Spartan wrote:
Darksider wrote:People shouldn't have to pay out of pocket to find their own rapists. It's not like they made a damn choice to get raped in the first place.
You're forgetting that a large number of conservatards think that if a woman is raped then it's her fault for being in a position to get raped in the first place.

Yes, it's reprehensible, but, well, there you are.

You REALLY think that a significant fraction of American conservatives believe a woman being raped is her own fault?

...wow

Big Phil · Post by **Big Phil** » 2008-09-11 07:55pm

The Spartan wrote:
Darksider wrote:People shouldn't have to pay out of pocket to find their own rapists. It's not like they made a damn choice to get raped in the first place.
You're forgetting that a large number of conservatards think that if a woman is raped then it's her fault for being in a position to get raped in the first place.

Yes, it's reprehensible, but, well, there you are.

Wow... that's one hell of a strawman you built up.

Dark Hellion · Post by **Dark Hellion** » 2008-09-11 07:58pm

If you allow the mouthpieces who are supposed to represent you continue to make statements to such effect, then yes, we have every reason to expect that conservative America is really that morally reprehensible.

Your silence about the absolute bullshit that conservative candidates have pulled over the last decade speaks volumes.

Jaevric · Post by **Jaevric** » 2008-09-11 07:59pm

For our next trick, we will require murder victim's life insurance & estate to be used to pay for the autopsy and man-hours dedicated to finding the killer.

I'm not going to make a comment on conservatives believing it's the woman's fault she's raped. I don't think most of them do, but some people conservative or not certainly seem to based on the effectiveness of the "she was asking for it" defense.

I am, however, going to comment that anyone who thinks it is reasonable to bill a rape victim for something like this is either intentionally cruel or mentally disturbed.

Darksider · Post by **Darksider** » 2008-09-11 08:00pm

CaptainChewbacca wrote:
You REALLY think that a significant fraction of American conservatives believe a woman being raped is her own fault?

...wow

A significant fraction of American conservatives are religious fundamentalists, who think we should revert to treating women as property like back in the fucking dark ages, so yes I damn well do believe they think it's the women's own fault when she gets raped.

Pop quiz: who is more likely to believe that a rape victim is a Slut who had it coming?

A: pro-choice left wing granola eater OR
B: a knuckle-dragging GOP-loving troglydite who believes that even a rape victim should be forced to carry the baby to term (something miss "moral choice" VP supports BTW).

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2008-09-11 08:02pm

CaptainChewbacca wrote: You REALLY think that a significant fraction of American conservatives believe a woman being raped is her own fault?

...wow

Considering a significant fraction of American conservatives justify any number of atrocities with "They had it coming?", do you really find this surprising?

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2008-09-11 08:02pm

General Zod wrote:
CaptainChewbacca wrote: You REALLY think that a significant fraction of American conservatives believe a woman being raped is her own fault?

...wow
Considering a significant fraction of American conservatives justify any number of atrocities with "They had it coming", do you really find this surprising?

Ghetto edit: First question mark obviously shouldn't be there.

Kanastrous · Post by **Kanastrous** » 2008-09-11 08:06pm

Listening to a BBC World News show on the topic, I was surprised by how widespread (Africa, Southeast Asia, South Asia, Eastern Europe, North Africa, needless-to-say the Near East) the sense is, that a woman who doesn't dress to the callers standards of decency, is 'asking to be attacked.'

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2008-09-11 08:09pm

Are there bigoted, mysogynist, racist republicans? Yes. Does the 'she had it coming' crowd make up a majority, or even a plurality of evangelical christians? I don't think so.

Furthermore, directly linking an aversion to abortion even in the case of rape (one I don't necessarily have) with 'she had it coming' is intellectually dishonest. I'd like to know what other atrocities I (as a republican) have condoned and justified as 'they had it coming' that I should be aware of. I may have to change my vacation plans.

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2008-09-11 08:10pm

Edit: Should clarify to 'evangelical christians in america'.

Darksider · Post by **Darksider** » 2008-09-11 08:13pm

CaptainChewbacca wrote:Are there bigoted, mysogynist, racist republicans? Yes. Does the 'she had it coming' crowd make up a majority, or even a plurality of evangelical christians? I don't think so.

Furthermore, directly linking an aversion to abortion even in the case of rape (one I don't necessarily have) with 'she had it coming' is intellectually dishonest. I'd like to know what other atrocities I (as a republican) have condoned and justified as 'they had it coming' that I should be aware of. I may have to change my vacation plans.

If you don't want people to think conservatives condone the "blame the victims" ideology, stop selecting those who espouse it as the prominent mouthpieces of your movement.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2008-09-11 08:15pm

CaptainChewbacca wrote:Are there bigoted, mysogynist, racist republicans? Yes. Does the 'she had it coming' crowd make up a majority, or even a plurality of evangelical christians? I don't think so.

Since when are all Republicans evangelical Christians? A "significant percentage" does not inherently translate into "Majority" either, so please use the same dictionary as the rest of us. A significant percentage of Democrats believed Obama was a Muslim a few months ago (15%), but that hardly means it was a majority.

Furthermore, directly linking an aversion to abortion even in the case of rape (one I don't necessarily have) with 'she had it coming' is intellectually dishonest. I'd like to know what other atrocities I (as a republican) have condoned and justified as 'they had it coming' that I should be aware of. I may have to change my vacation plans.

Who the fuck said anything about what you've condoned?

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2008-09-11 08:34pm

CaptainChewbacca wrote:How common is this 'victim pays' practice in the US?

North Carolina: Victim pays, but has a state fund to help.. Fund often runs out, apparently. Link

The vast majority of the 3,000 or so emergency room patients examined for sexual assaults each year shoulder some of the cost of a rape kit test, according to state records and victim advocates. For some, it's as little as a $50 insurance co-payment. For those without insurance, it's hundreds of dollars left when a state program designed to help reaches its limit.

The assistance program was started in 81, says the article. This practice appears to have stopped this year: Link

The News & Observer reported in February that the vast majority of the estimated 3,000 patients examined for rape in North Carolina hospitals last year were shouldering a portion of the bill. Legislators promised swift action, saying it wasn't fair for rape victims to have to pay for the state to prosecute sex offenders.

"It seemed inhumane to not take care of this," said state Rep. Alice Bordsen, a Democrat from Alamance County and one of the sponsors of the legislation.

This summer, legislators quadrupled the amount of money the program had to cover the costs of rape kit exams, carving out a $1,078,078 appropriation that will renew each year.

As of 2005, the Violence Against Women Act, demands that to receive grant money, the state must find the money to pay for those rape kits. Doesn't matter where, as long as it's not the victims. This will enter effect in 2009. The biggest name attached to this piece of legislation and it's continuing improvements is.. Biden. Link

In Illinois, this practice was apparently happening into 2001. Then someone hammered through legislation. If the name sounds familiar, you might be conscious. The Bill in Legalese While the relevent part is a bit tricky to understand, here's the University Of Chicago's Dean Of Students on the matter.. Link

According to the Sexual Assault Emergency Treatment Act, the Illinois Department of Public Aid will reimburse the costs of ER treatment if you do not have public aid or private medical insurance.

Under the Illinois Crime Victim's Compensation Act, if you report the assault to the police within 72 hours of the crime and if you file a claim application within two years of the date of the crime, you can be reimbursed for out-of-pocket medical expenses, loss of earnings, psychological counseling, and loss of support income due to the crime. Reimbursement can be up to $27,000.

While not as good as the 2005 addition by Biden, it was an improvement from the baseline. The sponsors in the State Senate? From the text of the bill...

Senate Sponsors:
DILLARD-OBAMA

My guess is that it was quite common. However, steps are being taken against it.. With the two Dems in favor of it, one of the Reps against it, and the other Rep.. Well.. Insufficient Data, but surely she could have done something about Wasilla's billing practices while screwing up acquisition of land.

Post by **Cairber** » 2008-09-11 09:04pm

This is made even more disgusting when you take into account the fact that the rape rate in Alaska is the highest in the nation....and no other state even comes close to them. This is also true of incest and other violent crimes against women (esp pregnant women) and children in the state of Alaska:

some info here

Big Phil · Post by **Big Phil** » 2008-09-12 12:05am

Hey "Conservatives blame the woman for being raped" douchebags; this being N&P, why don't you show some evidence for this assertion? Without trying to defend Chewbacca's mindless conservatism, if you can't back up your own mindless bullshit, take your unproven assertions and shove them up your collective asses.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2008-09-12 12:27am

SancheztheWhaler wrote:Hey "Conservatives blame the woman for being raped" douchebags; this being N&P, why don't you show some evidence for this assertion? Without trying to defend Chewbacca's mindless conservatism, if you can't back up your own mindless bullshit, take your unproven assertions and shove them up your collective asses.

Ignoring the fact that there have been idiots on here who in the past have justified atrocities with the tired old line "they had it coming. . . " the fact that you seem to be completely ignorant of this type of justification is pretty hilarious. I'll give you three guesses what types of people use it the most.

Source 1, Source 2.

A very thinly veiled attempt at saying "It's her fault."

Sauce 1 wrote:Recently on “The Abrams Report," the dogmatic justice show airing on MSNBC, Dan Abrams featured a commentator who asked this very question in regards to the abduction, torture, rape and murder of New York’s Imette St. Guillain at the local bar “The Falls.” Of course, Abrams was outraged and wouldn’t let the guy speak in complete sentences; but the commentator was not saying that girls like Natalee and Imette deserved to be killed but he believed these women, by separating from their respective groups to wander into the night alone while intoxicated, will find trouble.

Shocking, I know.

Sauce 2 wrote:Several studies using samples of college men also
reported significant links between attitudes and actual sexual aggressiveness (Briere et al., 1984; Koss, Leonard, Beezley, &
Oros, 1985; Mosher & Anderson, 1986; Rappaport & Burkhart,
1984). These studies measured self-reported sexual aggression
on a continuum of behaviors ranging from psychological
pressure on women to rape. Similar results were reported by
Kanin (1985) who compared the attitudes of 71 university
students who admitted committing rape with a control group of
non-aggressive college males. He found that a much higher
percentage of rapists justified rape in general than did
control subjects. Moreover, he found that rapists were far
more likely to believe their reputations would be enhanced
among their peers by aggressive behavior toward women, particularly those perceived as "pick-ups," "loose," "teasers," or "economic exploiters."