Sikh News Sikh Council Disappointed Over Rejection Of Hate Crime Bill

[Neutral Singh]

Press Trust of India
Washington, October 9

The Sikh Council on Religion and Education (SCORE) has expressed disappointment over the rejection of the Hate Crime Bill in the US Congress.

"Passing this legislation was an opportunity that was lost, to send a clear and strong message that America and its people will not tolerate any hate crime," National Chairman of SCORE, Rajwant Singh, said.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1048685,00050001.htm

 

[Arvind]

((( The hate crime bill called Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act (LLEEA) proposed to bring about changes in existing provisions to expand the protection to all victims of hate crime including gay and lesbians and financial support for state and local investigations and prosecutions of hate crimes. )))

Just thinking loudly, perhaps there were some clauses due to which bill is rejected. Learned members can throw more light on this, what are the reasons this event took place. There seems to be something more than outright rejection.

Regards.

 

[S|kH]

Ah, yes indeed. There was much more to the rejection.
Matter of fact the Sikh-thing had no significance to the bill being rejected by Republican negiotiaters.

Sikhs wanted the bill passed because it was increase funding for such protection over hate crimes, and would also take away useless procuderes which would make punishing the suspect faster.

Now, because they could not do this on their own, they had to add in their small details into an already *being-proposed* new hate crime bill. This new hate crime bill wanted to add the protection of homosexuals underneath the current hate crime laws.

And by adding this new feature, generally funding for such types of protection would have to increase, so the Sikhs tried to use this to their benefit.

Republican negiotaiters rejected this on the basis of the claim they did not think it was necessary to add gays/lesbians underneath the protection, NOT because they hate Sikhs or something of that nature.

Anways, read the following statement I submitted to sikhnet.com :

Recent News on Sikhnet frontpage had a link to a website, which stated the hate crimes bill was rejected by Republican negiotiaters :
http://www.123bharath.com/world-news/index.php?action=fullnews&id=27338

On this website, it states the Sikh community is upset because, "The US Congress has rejected a bill aimed at punishing those responsible for hate crimes based on race, colour, religion or national origin, disappointing the Sikh community which has been the target of such violence in the country of late.

When the Senate-approved proposal was presented at the House of Representatives on Thursday, Republican negotiators rejected the bill, aimed at strengthening the hate crime law."

The real reason for rejecting the Hate Crime Bill was
http://www.planetout.com/news/article.html?2004/10/08/1
:
"On Thursday House Republican negotiators rejected a Senate-approved proposal to include crimes targeting gay men and lesbians in the nation's federal hate-crimes law.

The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act (LLEEA) would have added real or perceived sexual orientation, gender and disability to federal hate crime laws, thus allowing the federal government the ability to provide assistance for the investigation and prosecution of hate crimes based on these categories.

Current hate crime laws cover offenses based on race, color, religion or national origin."

There is already a bill that protects against hate crimes of race, religion, color, or national origin. The Sikhs simply wanted more funding for such protection and tried to put it inside the new bill package, but the main component of the new bill package was adding Gays/Lesbians to the original Hate Crime protection laws.

That is the reason why Republican negiotiaters rejected the bill. Not, because they did not want to protect the Sikhs like the indian website makes it out to seem. We were not the ones most affected by this rejection -- the gays/lesbians are still far more affected by the outcome.

Whether you agree with the rejection or not, is up to you. I'm just pointing this out because the indian website makes a huge mistake and puts the wording into to a context that makes it seem as if Sikhs are not protected under any Hate crime law already.

We are fighting for more funding for current protection and more awareness to the police force to actually follow up procedure when a hate crime is filed.

"Liberal" media may try to twist things around to make it seem as if the "Republicans" hate the Sikhs. Personally, I would never trust an indian website to give me information on Domestic-American political issues.

Other than that, SCORE (Sikh group), and Sikh Council were dissappointed because the bill was not passed. I guess they have a right to be sad, but I'm not a fan of having homosexuals protected under the Hate Crimes Law, so I see no argument in it.

 

[Arvind]

Republican negiotaiters rejected this on the basis of the claim they did not think it was necessary to add gays/lesbians underneath the protection, NOT because they hate Sikhs or something of that nature.

That s a great help S|kh ji. Even when I was looking at LLEEA news, same thing came to my mind. Your post has interested me to look at the websites in detail, and also to get more info about real reason for rejection. I appreciate your efforts for pointing out the resources.

Regards.

 

[Arvind]

The real reason for rejecting the Hate Crime Bill was
http://www.planetout.com/news/article.html?2004/10/08/1

This says very clearly that - Current hate crime laws cover offenses based on race, color, religion or national origin.

What was rejected is clear from this - On Thursday House Republican negotiators rejected a Senate-approved proposal to include crimes targeting gay men and lesbians in the nation's federal hate-crimes law.

Somehow, when I read the first post about clip, it appeared to me that Sikh council is concerned about hate crimes against sikhs, which however is not the case. The problem is due to inclusion of hate crime against sexual-orientation, which I consider a separate issue altogether.

Thanks.

 

[S|kH]

Sikh council was disappointed because if this law would have passed, it would have made it easier to punish the suspect of the hate crime, and the process would have been more efficient.

If gays/lesbians were added to protection of the Hate Crime Law, funding would have increased, and the process would have been easier.

This would have been a benefit to the Sikhs, as we are the victims of many hate crimes.

But, the reasons for rejection were not to hurt the Sikhs in any form as the indian website makes it out to seem.

We didn't get what we wanted, but I don't think it was that big of a deal...the real issue being if gays/lesbians should be protected....which I also think is a completetly different issue.

 

[Arvind]

I agree. Looking at the totality of the bill, I dont find it a big deal. This is my personal opinion though.