Policy Making and the Unborn Victims of Violence Act 2004
I. Pick a policy area & a specific proposal (e.g. the 2002 McCain-Feingold Bipartisan- Campaign Reform Act; the 2004 Unborn Victims of Violence Act; the Respect for- America’s Fallen Heroes Act of 2006; the 2009 Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act; the S-CHIP (State Children’s Health Insurance Program) enactment in 2002 or the conflict over its expansion in 2007-2009; the 2013 Reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act; the 2014 Farm Bill; the 2014 two-year federal budget agreement; are all good possible topics). A good place to begin looking for a topic is in the indexes of the Congressional Quarterly Weekly Reports (available on-line, for free, through our library web-site. The Congressional Quarterly Weekly web-site will not give you full-text articles without paying a large membership fee. There is a tutorial posted on Titanium that will assist you in navigating the CSUF library’s CQ Weekly database.
II. Clearly identify the community problem the proposal was intended to address and how the government’s agenda was set. Identifying how the agenda was set is not always easy and in many cases you may have to rely on the public statements of policy advocates (in newspapers or election campaign news coverage). Some policy proposals will have very obvious "triggering events" (e.g. the creation of the Dept. of- Homeland Security in 2002 or the enactment of the 1974 Federal Election Campaign Act- Amendments, for example). Other policy proposals will require more creativity, research, or a discussion with me during my office hours. Our discussions should give you some guidance in this aspect of your paper. Elections, party agendas (articulated in their party platforms, revised at their national convention every four years), presidential priorities and major events that highlight some social problem often set Congress’s agenda. Describe what the policy would do and clearly identify which national government institution (s) you are writing about (Congress, president, judiciary, interest groups, media, parties etc.). Remember: This paper must be about national policymaking and politics (Congress, President or the Supreme Court): Not politics or government in the State of California or any other single state, exclusively. Identify the political players involved in the political process you're writing about (e.g. the president, key members of Congress, interest groups and political parties). Identify the most important proponents & opponents of the policy proposal. Describe what proponents & opponents of the proposal did to try to enact or block the policy proposal (This should be the heart of your paper). Proponents and opponents include government officeholders, private interest groups and political parties which try to influence the outcome of the public policymaking process. Resolution: Did the policy proposal become law, or did it die somewhere in the policymaking process. Most importantly, how did it happen? (Sometimes seeing how policy proposals are defeated is more interesting than seeing how they become law). Summary/Conclusion: Summarize in a paragraph or two how the institution you studied operated and articulate any conclusions you may have arrived at with respect to your policy area, the government, the political institutions you studied or the policymaking process in general.
Course: POSC 100 Policy making
Instructor
Date
Policy Making and the Unborn Victims of Violence Act 2004
Community problem to be addressed by proposal
The Unborn Victims of Violence Act 2004 (UVVA) or 'Laci and Conner's Law was a legislation passed in both the house and Senate with the aim of protecting the unborn children. The main issue to be considered in the Act was whether a fetus qualified to be a person when pregnant women faced violence and harm. In 2004, Laci a pregnant mother had been brutally murdered and her unborn fetal son Conner (Reinhart 101). Even though, the crime was committed in California it had bigger ramifications at the national level resulting to the legislation of the Unborn Victims of Violence Act 2004.
Before the Unborn Victims of Violence Act 2004 was adopted the law mostly considered the rights of the mother, while there was no agreement on the criminality of fetal homicide. Criminals were charged for violent acts against the mothers, but the rights of the unborn children were not considered. Laci Peterson’s husband was charged with her murder and that of their unborn child. The bill first passed through the Republican held House before passing through Senate requiring a more bipartisanship effort. The Republicans held that the fetus could legally be considered a person so long as it was attached to a woman’s uterus.
. Policy’s intention and national government institutions
The policy held that under the Federal law a person who caused harm or injury to a child in the womb would then been charged with a separate offense for such actions besides the charges related to the mother (Congress.Gov). The implication of this is that violence committed towards pregnant women would be charged for acts against two victims. Other than being charged with two offenses, the accused were to answer to all crimes committed that resulted in harming the mother and fetus. In any case, the protection of victims of violence by the Federal law recognized that child engagement extended to the unborn children.
The institutions involved in the Act were the legislature/ Congress consisting of the House of Representatives and the Senate. The legislative arm of the government is essential to the passage of proposed bills before the President assents to an Act of Congress. The Bill sailed through the House easily since the Republicans had the numbers, but then passed through the Senate after debate on specific provisions to be amended and being signed into law. The Congressional members were provided the opportunity to talk in support or in opposition of the UVVA. Debate is an essential component to identifying elements that may need to be amended before passing, but the Bill may also be passed with only minimal changes in the wording.
Political players in the political process
The UVVA legislation was sponsored by Congresswoman Melissa Hart (R-Pa. and Senator Mike DeWine (R-Ohio) in the two houses. the Bill had widespread support among the Republicans, with Pro life lobbies also keen for the enactment of the legislature. However, the pro-choice advocates argued that it was an attempt to repeal Roe v. Wade, widely recognized for having expanded the recognition of reproductive rights (Dowdy 7). Representative Lofgren strongly supported the Bill but recognized the need to tone down on aggressive pro-life arguments (Alongi, 288). Another major contention was the Murray amendment proposed by Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA. focused on defining domestic and sexual violence to include family members of the victims (NRLC.org).
Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Ca.) tried to stall the adoption of UVVA argued that the law ought to have only recognized the right of one victim when a pregnant women was involved. Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren also argued for the ‘single-victim substitute’ approach (NRLC.org). The two also argued that ether would be a separate legislation covering the interruption to the normal pregnancy. However, proponents attacked this position arguing that the death of an unborn child after criminal acts and violence against pregnant mothers results in mourning for the child loss. Subsequently, both chambers rejected the proposed clause to consider the single-victim substitute (NRLC.org).
Proponents & opponents attempts to influence policy proposal
The ardent proponents of the UVVA argued that the bill would go a long way to defining what life was, denying women the rights outlined in Roe v. Wade (Alongi 294) The Democrats used this line of thinking to try to defeat the stat...