Today’s vote on the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) reminds us of Steve King’s pattern of not supporting victims of abuse and harassment.

Instead of supporting the bipartisan Senate version of the Violence Against Women Act,  passed by vote of 68-31. which expands protection to immigrants, members of the LGBT community and Native Americans, Steve King made several attempts to pick and choose which Iowans were worthy of legal protection from their abusers.

Congress eventually passed a partial reauthorization late this afternoon; refusing to commit to the type of full reauthorization seen in previous years.

The final version passed today rolls back critical provisions to help victims of abuse, said Vice President Joe Biden.

In the lead-up to the vote today, Christie Vilsack, King’s opponent in Iowa’s 4th district, issued a public appeal to King calling on him to fully reauthorize VAWA. Iowa Democratic Party Chairwoman Sue Dvorsky issued a statement as well. Dvorsky said, “continuing any form of this type of discrimination is simply unacceptable.”

Sadly, this is not the first time King has taken a stance against victims. In 2011, King supported then presidential candidate Herman Cain when Cain faced sexual harassment charges. King dismissed the charges as being without substance and said “this shouldn’t have been a story.”

People from all across the country and the state who stand up for victims disagreed with King. When a presidential candidate faces allegations of sexual harassment, it absolutely is a story. It is an important story.

In fact, King goes as far as to question the whole idea of sexual harassment. “It’s a terrible concept,” said King, “to define an action by the perception of the perceived victim.” Excuse me, Congressman, Violence against women is not a perceived crime.

It is a harsh reality too many women in Iowa face. They deserve protection from their abusers and they deserve better representation from their Congressman.

Congressman King’s History of Opposing the Violence Against Women Act

[Material courtesy of http://christievilsackforiowa.com/]

KING SPOKE AGAINST THE REAUTHORIZATION OF VAWA IN 2005: In the House Rules Committee, King argued that the Violence Against Women Act interfered “in the relationship of marriage that I think we should stay out of.” [Transcripts, House Rules Committee, 109-1^st, September 27, 2005]

INTRODUCED AMENDMENT TO REMOVE VAWA FROM DOJ REAUTHORIZATION: In 2005, King introduced an amendment to “strike the Violence Against Women Act from the Department of Justice Reauthorization Act.” [House Rules Committee, Summary of Amendments on H.R. 3402, September 27, 2005]

SPOKE AGAINST VICTIMS’ RIGHTS IN 2011: Steve King came to the defense of presidential candidate Herman Cain in the wake of sexual harassment charges. King argued against the concept of sexual harassment, saying “it’s a terrible concept to define an action by the perception of the perceived victim.” [Slate.com, 11/2/11]

VOTED AGAINST CONSIDERATION OF VAWA REAUTHORIZATION IN MARCH, 2012: King voted against the consideration of the Violence Against Women Act reauthorization in March. [Roll Call 139, 3/28/12]

Des Moines – As a call-in guest on WHO-1040 News Radio’s “Simon Conway Show” Thursday [5/10/12], Steve King told listeners that if they are worried about the IRS, they have another option: A Swiss Bank account.

Responding to Conway’s disdainful comments regarding Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann’s stint as a Swiss citizen, King replied, “Swiss are fine people, neutral, good place to send money if you are worried about the IRS.”

King’s comment could be taken in good humor if it wasn’t already well known that the Congressman despises the IRS and has a track record of making hostile comments about the government agency.

In 2010, Rep. Steve King told a crowd at the annual CPAC event that he could “empathize” with the suicide bomber who had attacked an IRS office in Austin, and encouraged attendees at the conservative event to “implode” other IRS offices, according to a witness. In a video he admits to having been audited by the IRS and confirms that he has wanted to abolish the “intrusive” agency for years.

That Congressman King thinks it’s appropriate to dodge taxes and not pay his fair share is almost as disturbing as cracking jokes about bombing a building. Making matters worse, as King is encouraging the wealthy to hide their assets offshore, he’s also voted to raise taxes on working families and supports a national 23 percent sales tax, which would force middle class families to pay more while letting the wealthiest Americans off the hook.That’s not working for Iowa — or America.

Its appalling that Iowans and members of the media have come to expect this sort of behavior from Steve King.

Meanwhile, Switzerland has been a hot topic among Republicans lately. In April, Mitt Romney disclosed that he had kept assets in a Swiss bank account; a fact he initially previously failed to report on disclosure forms.

As reported by the LA Times in February 2012:

“A review by the Los Angeles Times/Tribune Washington Bureau last week found that at least 23 funds and partnerships listed in the 2010 tax returns of Romney and his wife did not show up or were not listed in the same fashion on Romney’s most recent financial disclosure, including 11 based in low-tax foreign countries such as Bermuda, the Cayman Islands and Luxembourg.”

Congressman Steve King has a long and consistent record of voting for issues that are not in the best interests of Iowans. During his 10 years in Congress, he has repeatedly voted against legislation that would promote job growth and economic prosperity here in Iowa, make college more affordable for students, and ensure Iowa’s seniors can get the health care and services they need.

He claims that he would like to focus on the issues, but a closer look at his voting record indicates that he’s not interested in solving those issues. Instead, his votes make the issues worse.

Examples of this include:

– Voting against considering the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act this year, arguing that it interferes “in the relationship of marriage.”

– Supporting the Ryan Budget for two years in a row. When questioned at town halls across the state, he has falsely said that it doesn’t cut Medicare or Pell Grants, both of which it does cut, and drastically so.

– Steadfastly supporting the Fair Tax, a plan that would burden the middle class and seniors, while giving more tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans.

–Masquerading as a supporter of wind energy, a vital industry in Iowa. But he has spent years voting against it. He even opposed a bill that the American Wind Energy Association praised as “essential” to growing the industry.

–Claiming to be a fiscal conservative, but voting for two unfunded wars, an unfunded Medicare Part D, and unfunded tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans – all of which have directly contributed to our nation’s debt and deficit crisis.

And the list goes on. Congressman King’s 10-year record should leave a lot of questions in the minds of voters.

How can he represent a district with a large senior population while voting to end Medicare as we know it? How can he expect students graduating high school this month to afford an education when he’s taking away Pell Grants? How can he be trusted to support wind and renewable fuels, important growing industries in his district? Will he finally put his constituents ahead of special interests? Why is he more interested in building a national profile than proposing solutions for his district?

If he wants to talk about the issues, he should start by addressing his hypocrisy and inconsistency during his ten years in Congress, years which have had wasteful spending, partisan extremism, and gridlock as their hallmarks.

As he introduces himself to a district that’s over 50 percent new to him, voters will demand answers to these questions and take a hard look at how his positions on the issues benefit them. The truth is, unless they’re a special interest, his policies don’t help them and they don’t create opportunities for middle class families, seniors, and students.

Iowa voters should believe Steve King when he tells them that he doesn’t support reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) because his record [Roll Call 139, 3/28/12] says so.

• In 2005, he introduced an amendment to block re-authorization of VAWA because he claimed the legislation showed “hostility” toward men and interfered “in the relationship of marriage.”
• In 2012, as 61 senators have co-sponsored a re-authorization that would further improve the law’s effectiveness and meet the changing needs of victims, King remains an outspoken critic of renewing the law which has added provisions that will extend protections to gays, lesbians, transgendered people, Native Americans and battered immigrant women.

When Steve King says he opposes the proposed Woman’s Option to Raise Kids (WORK) Act, Iowa voters should take him at his word.  Frankly, his out -of-touch rhetoric is all the proof you need.

• Encouraged by a recent bipartisan agreement that stay-at-home moms should be considered just as hard working as anyone in the workforce, Democrats proposed introducing legislation that would allow mothers with children ages 3 and under to stay at home with their children and continue receiving benefits. The bill would apply to mothers on welfare as well. On this one, Steve King promptly jumped from his previous message that “raising children is the most precious and valuable work that gets done in America,” to likening it to choosing whether or not to “wash your car.”

But if Steve King tells them, “I don’t have any corporate contributions into my campaign,” as he did during a town hall meeting on April 6 in Jefferson, IA, they should NOT believe him because he is lying.

In fact, to date, Congressman Steve King has received over $100,000 in corporate PAC contributions to his Fourth District campaign against his Democratic opponent, Christie Vilsack.

This is, of course, not the first time Steve King has mislead his constituents in Iowa. Steve King has been caught misleading voters on several occasions. It merely demonstrates again how far out of touch he is with the people he was elected to represent.

“In order for Iowans to get the most from our representatives, it requires a base level of transparency about their principles, priorities, and vision to improve Iowa,” said Chairwoman Sue Dvorsky.  “Steve King’s latest attempt to deceive voters shows that he doesn’t understand that. Or he doesn’t care. Or both.”

King’s effort to misrepresent himself to voters on something so obviously untrue is not wholly the issue here. The larger issue is that he is unwilling to be forthright regarding his campaign donors which, in effect, prevent Iowans from properly discerning whether or not there are fundamental conflicts of interest that could cloud his judgment when he is making important decisions on their behalf.

DES MOINES –  While taking questions from audience members at a recent town hall in Algona, Iowa, Rep. Steve King was asked whether he would have supported higher taxes if George W. Bush wanted more revenue to pay for the Iraq war.

His answer: “I don’t know if I would have or not.”

The response would be in direct opposition to the Americans for Tax Reform anti-tax pledge he signed, and a step away from the goals of Club for Growth, a 527 group, who dropped $58,000 into his conservative campaign war chest last quarter.

King added that he had talked to longtime conservative anti-tax promoter Grover Norquist about “what do we do when we get taxes down to where they need to be? At some point we’re going to cut taxes too much. What’s the answer then? I’m thinking about that.” Norquist, the author of the no-tax pledge, expects those representatives supported by his group, Americans for Tax Reform, to follow him blindly.

“At a certain point, Steve King will have to realize that he was sent to Washington to represent the people of Iowa’s Fourth District, and not the special interest lobby of Washington D.C.,” said Iowa Democratic Party Chairwoman Sue Dvorsky. “Iowans have a right to know where Steve King stands on raising their taxes. He is trying to have it both ways on this issue by making an irresponsible pledge and then trying to go back on it. Iowans deserve better.”

King is just the latest Republican to waver on Norquist’s anti-tax pledge. Others include Reps. Timothy Johnson (R-IL), Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE), Charles Boustany (R-LA), Mike Simpson (R-ID), Frank Wolf (R-VA), and Pennsylvania state Rep. John Bear.