We need people to call Tom Lantos to express opinions against the proposed federal legislation.
From Carol Leigh:
This is a letter just about this specific issue in the media, but the TVPRA is full of problems. I decided to write a targeted letter, but you can write your own, or send this. Maybe you should change it a bit…I think a campaign is helpful. Give him a call.
His secretary said said calling is best. Tell him where you live. We need people from San Mateo where he is from.
Local Tel 650-342-0300
DC Tel 202-225-3531
DC Fax 202-226-4183
CA12lantos@mail. house.gov is the best email.
Dear Congressman Lantos,
As a concerned citizen from [your location] I am asking that you eliminate the amendment to the Trafficking Victims Protection Act scheduled for an imminent vote, Section 221 (f)-see below.
This amendment would blur the intentions of the Mann Act and would adversely effect the ability of the FBI to combat real crime in this country, distracting the FBI with the job of monitoring the commercial sex industry.
I am very disappointed that our newly elected Democratic majority has focused on submitting legislation that increases government oversight into our private lives in the guise of helping women. Many experts and academics, as well as our own Government Accountability Office have recognized the diversions and moral panics that have accompanied the current response to trafficking.
We needs initiatives to protect all workers from abuse including migrants, undocumented workers and sex industry workers. Laws that target commercial sex in general are shameful response to the myriad of abuses in our labor markets including slavery and other forms of forced labor.
Section 221 (f) which adds the phrase ‘or affects’ `and in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States,’ to the Mann Act as below:
(f) Transportation Generally- Section 2422(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended– (1) by inserting `or affecting’ after `travel in’; and
(2) by inserting `in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States,’ after `foreign commerce,’.
As our own Department of Justice points out (reported in the Washington Post on November 29, 2007), this change “…would expand federal jurisdiction to cover prostitution offenses, which the department calls unnecessary and ‘a diversion from Federal law enforcement’ s core anti-trafficking mission.’ “
Thank you for your attention.
1 Comment(s)
Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI
Leave a comment
How about pointing out that the office of Human trafficking recently admitted that it has only been able to find a fraction of the trafficking victims that it estimated. Of the 50,000 per year estimated, they only found 1100 in 8 years. That is less than 1%. Washington Post reports that most of them were consensual adult prostitutes where the circumstances were sensationalized into a trafficking beef.
There obviously has been a great deal of over exaggerating of this issue by poeple who’s real motive is to promote an anti-prostitition agenda by conflating terminology such as slavery, trafficking, and child sex into the mix of everything.
The FBI and Justice Dept are opposed to it because it is absurd and ther is not Constitutional basis for a law banning sex between adults. Additionally, it is absurd to expand a law when we now know that grounds for the original law were greatly falsified.
These self-perpetuating govt power grabs which are countercurrent to facts and the Constitution must end. Its time to have rationale decisions with accurate statistics in lieu of hysterics and sensationalism making public policy.