Claire McCaskill, ordinary blue dog opposes Gillibrand's bill on sexual assault.

[Mass]

Ms McCaskill opposes Gillibrand's bill on sexual assault in the military, says that chain of command would be respected.

Shockingly, Ted Cruz and Rand Paul are both more correct on this issue than McCaskill.


Can I have my campaign donations back.
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/political-fix/mccaskill-cites-painful-arguments-in-fight-over-sexual-assault-in/article_7fc5fc0b-5c8e-56ca-9444-28bb3ed54786.html

But Gillibrand has mobilized significant backing for her amendment to dramatically overhaul the current system by stripping commanders of their authority to determine whether cases can proceed and vesting that power in a new branch of independent military prosecutors.

Amid a rash of high-profile sexual assault cases, Gillibrand claims to have gotten commitments from nearly half of the senators. The Senate is scheduled to consider hers and other amendments in coming days as part of the annual National Defense Authorization Act.

...

Gillibrand contends that given retaliation against victims in the past, prosecutions should be removed from the chain-of-command both to protect victims and to encourage reporting.

McCaskill's counter-argument, which she reiterated today, is that commanders of military units can't be held accountable "if they can wash their hands of any responsibility. And that's what her proposal would do."

McCaskill added: "Her side is saying it's victims versus commanders. Whose side are you on? The reality is ... how do we build a system that protects and empowers victims and results in more prosecutions and holds the commanders accountable? We think our reform checks all of the boxes and Kirsten's just fails."

[Jamaal510]

1. I don't get why ANY woman would oppose this. nt