Uness Nyambi, now about 17, was betrothed as a child so her parents could finance her brother's choice of a bride and now has two children and a husband around 70. (Venessa Vick for the New York TImes)
I awoke this morning to news that the United States House of Representatives failed to pass a bill that would pledge to combat global child marriage over the next 5 years, with only 12 republicans voting in favor (9 democrats voted against). I’m not sure how this can be construed as a partisan issue, and neither did the Senate; the companion bill passed there UNANIMOUSLY. This bill appropriated no new money now. It merely stated that this issue would be a priority and that appropriations would be considered in the future.
Representatives John Boehner (R-OH) and Eric Cantor (R-VA), who will become majority leader and whip in January, urged their party members to vote against the bill.
Child marriage is a huge, depressing problem worldwide, especially in developing countries where young girls are denied freedom to choose their own spouses and traded to men several times their age in order to provide social standing, money and goods to their poor families. This bill would have supported the building of schools, latrines and other services for kids as an alternative to marriage and pregnancy (young girls are at higher risk of obstetric fistula due to underdevelopment) at an age when they are barely able to menstruate.
I’m contacting my representative (Christopher Lee of NY-26) and asking him why he voted against this bill.
Dick Durbin (D-IL), summed up the possible effects of the vote as follows:
The action on the House floor stopping the Child Marriage bill tonight will endanger the lives of millions of women and girls around the world,” Durbin said in a statement after Thursday’s House vote. “These young girls, enslaved in marriage, will be brutalized and many will die when their young bodies are torn apart while giving birth. Those who voted to continue this barbaric practice brought shame to Capitol Hill.
Steve LaTourette (R-OH) was similarly enraged:
Yesterday, I was on the floor, and I was a co-sponsor with a piece of legislation with the Gentlelady from Minnesota, Ms. McCollum, that would have moved money — no new money — would have moved money so that societies that are coercing young girls into marriage, we could build them latrines so they could go to school. Or we could make sure that they stay in school so they’re not forced into marriage at the age of 12 and 13.But all of a sudden, there was a fiscal argument. When that didn’t work, then people had to add an abortion element to it. Look, this is a partisan place. I’m a Republican. I’m glad we beat their butt in the election; we’re going to be in the majority next year. But there comes a time when enough is enough, and McCollum’s bill was a good bill last night. … We should stop the nonsense, approve the bill and move on.
I’d like to ask every representative that voted against this bill when their young teen and tween children and grandchildren will be leaving school and getting married.
If the bill doesn’t involve any new funding and won’t have anything to do with abortion, how did the Republicans get the impression that it would? Wouldn’t it be worth it to add a post-script that says “No funding in this bill will go toward abortions, you idiots” in order to get the thing passed?
“The process has been closed. There have been no hearings held in the House and there is no opportunity to amend the bill.”
Oh. Well then…
Disgusting. What possible rationale could someone have to vote against it? (Then again, I wondered the same thing about the crazy idea that all Americans should be entitled to health care.) Let us know what Rep. Lee says.
I really do wonder if these people who voted against this bill have any shred of compassion in them. Do they have a clue of what it is like to be the age of their child or grandchild and to be forced into a marriage with no hope of an education, of freedom to make grown-up decisions, a chance to rise up out of poverty, of adequate health care?
What I find so ironic is that we have laws on our books protecting our own daughters on several levels from things related to their physical and sexual protection, yet we give the message that we don’t give a shit about other people’s daughters. And the best thing they can come up with is “well maybe there will be more abortions if this is allowed.” My local representative, a lame duck republican voted no. His replacement is even more right winged then he is.
It makes me sad and quite angry.