Held to answer

No wonder women get slapped around.

Consider the spectacle they created in a hearing room at the Oregon State Capitol, where a legislative committee took testimony on a proposed law to drop mandatory-minimum sentences for first-degree sexual abuse, second-degree robbery and second-degree assault.

Here they came over two days of hearings, women representing groups with names like “Oregon Alliance to End Violence Against Women,” “Human Services Coalition of Oregon,” “Mid-Valley Women’s Crisis Service,” “Citizens United for Rehabilitation of Errants” (how quaint: calling a violent felon an “errant”).

They all urged passage of House Bill 3194, which would reduce – in some cases eliminate – time behind bars for men (it’s usually men) who sexually abuse, rob or assault. It’s a 54-page bill and includes other features favorable to offenders, such as increasing earned time to have 30 percent knocked off prison sentences.

Why would women be in favor of this?

Money.

With guidance from the Pew Center on the States, domestic violence groups lobbied for HB 3194 because they believe that the money saved by not incarcerating offenders – or giving them shorter sentences –  will go to women’s groups.

Lindsey Nelson, a domestic violence survivor who now works as an advocate, told the committee there were about “22,000 cries for help that went unmet in 2010.”

She described what happens to these women: “You go back into a home that has now become exponentially more dangerous and imprisoning due to the attempt made. To truly address the safety of the public, we must reinvest in victim services.”

By Nelson’s reasoning, if the Legislature passes HB 3194 fewer violent men will get locked up, and then the state can take the savings and give it to the victims.

One woman after another joined this craven sisterhood.

Amanda Green, who spoke in a little girl voice, said she was an advocate for victims’ rights: “I want to improve Oregon and …  reinvest public safety dollars.”

When she was 16, she said she was drugged and assaulted by her boyfriend, who “threatened and emotionally manipulated” her into silence.

“I never sought justice for the crime,” Green said.

Instead, she sought “services” and implied that this was a better alternative than seeking justice, because “nothing can take away violence that has already occurred.”

Suzie Elmer, who works with survivors of domestic violence in Josephine County, said she often finds survivors camped outside her office.

“It is very dark at night … there is no help for them. … They are staying with friends that are sometimes only marginally better than their abuser. …They get angry with us.”

Elmer asked the committee to “please increase safety” by passing HB 3194.

How will making it easier for violent men to remain free increase safety?

These women were badly used by Pew, which wants to score another prisoner’s rights victory for their organization. (Visit Pew’s Website and see what they consider good news. Example: Easing the three-strikes law in California; among the felonies no longer considered serious is gun possession by an ex-felon.)

There was a time – and it wasn’t that long ago – when women’s groups were urging legislators to take domestic violence seriously. One way society demonstrates the seriousness of a crime is by the punishment attached to that crime.

It has taken a long time to persuade police, prosecutors and the courts to treat domestic violence seriously. When I was a young newspaper reporter I did my share of stories trying to educate readers about domestic violence. I found that many police officers did not like domestic abuse calls; the odds were that the victims eventually would turn against the police.

What some abused women want is for the authorities to magically change their husbands or boyfriends. To take the bad boys they were attracted to – and had babies with – and change them into loving, devoted providers.

If a woman is dependent on her abuser to pay the rent, she may get angry to discover there are no “services” to step in and play breadwinner.

I understand how helping a woman become financially independent can help free her from abuse, but many of the women who testified talked about offenders as if they, too, were victims. These are men who simply need a better education or a better job.

None of these women seemed to consider that there might be something skewed about rewarding criminal behavior. How do you explain this to law-abiding taxpayers who might also like a better education or a better job?

What these women ignored while they were selling out is that they are endangering other women – who will end up on the receiving end of a fist, a knife or a gun should HB 3194 pass and become law.

This was the story brought by a few other women. Although they were outnumbered by the abuse professionals, when these women spoke they didn’t sound like they were reading from Pew’s Website.

Emily Wood, now 25, was routinely abused by her grandfather from the age of 5 until she was 13.

“This is the kind of sex abuse in the first-degree we see every day …,” said Clackamas County Deputy District Attorney Michael Regan. “We didn’t bring Emily here because of some gratuitous case.”

Teresa McCart, Emily’s mother, urged the committee to keep the minimum-mandatory sentence.

“I don’t regret having my father in prison,” she said.

Marion County Deputy District Attorney Katie Suver told of a man who sexually abused his 9-year-old granddaughter, touching her vaginal area while he masturbated until, as the little girl put it – “he peed on my pants.”

The men and women on the legislative committee listened silently, several of them looked down.

“I want that to be uncomfortable for you to hear,” Suver said.

Under the change in law they are contemplating, the grandfather would have gotten probation. As it is, he had gotten away with crimes before. It turned out his granddaughter was not the first.

“What we are talking about is child molesters,” Suver said. “If we are not willing to step up and protect children … then we shouldn’t be in this business.”

I’m glad that she was willing to risk discomfort. For me, it was sickening to sit in a hearing room and listen to women make excuses for why violent men should be given a break – just so the women might be able to divvy-up some savings for themselves.

Instead of bargaining with the public’s safety, these women should look to Health and Human Services – which consumes half of the state’s general fund budget – to help support domestic violence shelters.

These women’s groups should also consider the possibility that even if HB 3194 passes, they won’t get much. Think about it.

How much clout do these women’s groups have, especially now?

– Pamela Fitzsimmons