I've been following this event in the blogosphere for awhile but I wanted to assure it wasn't fictional Internet material. The media, however, is now reporting on it and it's accurate.

Back in 2000, when Palin was mayor of Wasilla, the following event occurred and was reported in the local paper in the Wasilla area:

: Knowles signs sexual assault bill

- Frontiersman

It's now starting to hit the general media today:

Palin's town used to bill victims for rape kits - USATODAY.com

This issue I suspect will become a larger issue, and I'm raising it because it does bother me quite a bit that this occurred. The idea that rape victims would ever be charged for the assault evidence (basically the rape kit evidence to test the rapists' semen, etc,) is very bothersome.

It does seem to me from reading the 2000 article that Palin did have knowledge and consent to it. Wasilla is a small town, she appointed the chief being quoted, and she has claimed she was the 'person with the responsibilities' in her comments to the public recently. Although I certainly don't think she is pro-rapist because that would be absurd, it seems utterly callous to cite saving taxpayer money as a reason to charge raped women and others for collecting the rape evidence from them. In fact, it even deters reporting the crime because poor women can't afford to pay it.

She denies she ever supported charging these victims, but the denial coming only now isn't credible to me. As the ancient maxim goes: qui tacet consentire videtur: He who keeps silent is assumed to consent; silence gives consent.

If she had objected, it would have been front and centre back when the incidents were occurring, thus never needing a law to be passed to prevent it. It took a state law to stop it. She was apparently silent when it became big enough an issue that a state law was being proposed to stop it, and yet the practice continued right until the state law was passed. The AK state police and other municipalities plus the governor were expressing outrage at the practice, and nothing stopped the practice in Wasilla. No objecting comments by her appear in the 2000 article to her police chief--whom she appointed--even when he went on the record when the law was enacted to express his opposition because such rape kit tests would otherwise be paid by taxpayers. Wasilla is also a small town, and by her own comments at the RNC and on other stumps, she claims as mayor she was the one with executive responsibility for the town.

What also bothers me is that she did indeed hire lobbyists to get money from Washington and did receive all sorts of large funding for projects, but for the sake of saving between $5,000 to $14,000 a year, women had to pay up for Wasilla to test them to get evidence to charge their rapists.

The practice of charging rape victims for rape kit evidence is now required via funding incentives by federal law, but what's also noticed by me today is that Biden sponsored it, Obama co-sponsored it with 58 others, but McCain did not.

Whilst the claim has not been made against Biden, when I hear Palin say at the RNC that Obama has "not a single major law or even a reform," I think it's things like this that dispel such a remark as untruthful, and even leaves her and McCain for their own things to answer for things he has helped pass.

If dedicated McCain/Palin supporters get outraged by the theme of my thread, so be it, but I'd just like to state up front that it's not my intent to taunt and troll by picking this theme and expressing my sentiments on it.

This subject has bothered me for the last few days, and it does need public discussion IMO. It's stuff like this that I think people ought to be talking about insofar as analysing tickets, judgements, views, etc, and have a decent conversation about it. What I'm seeing here just seems so callous to me on McCain and Palin for which Obama and Biden ought to be thanked for curing.

A woman who has just been raped and must endure additional humiliation of this:



plus vaginal investigation and swabbings, etc, should never have been humiliated, insulted and burdened by their own town police to have to personally pay for the collection of the evidence just so her attacker can be held accountable for his serious body violation and crime. And from a crime enforcement perspective, it just seem ludicrous and helpful to rapists rather than rape victims insofar as encouraging raped women to report the crime and/or for collection of incriminating evidence of that crime.

__________________

OSB it's totally sexist and an unfair attack for you to bring this up. For shame. Palin didn't act because she didn't think it was within her bounds. She didn't know, somehow about it. She loves her kids, how can you say she didn't care about rape victims. Are you insinuating she's a rapist?!?! How dare you. She's a hockey mom, of course she's anti-rape, the insinuation, why..I just...I just.

__________________
Yesterday, John McCain actually said that if he’s president he’ll take on, and I quote, 'the old boys’ network in Washington.' I’m not making this up. This is somebody been in Congress for 26 years, who put seven of the most powerful Washington lobbyists in charge of his campaign. And now he tells us that he’s the one who’s gonna take on the old boys' network,” he said. “In the McCain campaign that’s called a staff meeting!- Obama, 9/17/2008

Rape is a subject that disgusts me in many ways, but I have the ultimate sympathy for Rape victims. (I don't think that's an unusual opinion)

To Punish the victims of rape, by either:

1) Charging the victim for cost of the forensic tests (the subject of the OP)
OR
2) Legislating an ideology that forces a rape victim to carry the fetus of her attacker to full term (projecting the end-game of Palins' abortion stance)

..is completely abhorrent to me.

__________________

The world could use more Stan Ovshinsky's

If this story gets national play, it strikes me that a McCain/Palin ticket could lose some of the female support that it's ostensibly gotten a boost from (assuming that it has, in fact).

I'm as much for trimming out unnecessary shit for the taxpayers to pay for, but I would put collecting evidence and representing victims squarely inside my (relatively small) take on "provide for the common good".

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

Well if the media is "liberally biased" as is claimed. This will be a front page story. Let's see how that plays out. I won't hold my breath.

__________________
Yesterday, John McCain actually said that if he’s president he’ll take on, and I quote, 'the old boys’ network in Washington.' I’m not making this up. This is somebody been in Congress for 26 years, who put seven of the most powerful Washington lobbyists in charge of his campaign. And now he tells us that he’s the one who’s gonna take on the old boys' network,” he said. “In the McCain campaign that’s called a staff meeting!- Obama, 9/17/2008

I'm noticing a trend with McCain.

First he slams Obama for passing a bill in the Illinois legislature the teaching kindergarteners how to react to potential sexual predators. Now he refuses to cosign a federal law that would prevent rape victims from being charged with rape kits.

__________________
Is our children learning? -George W. Bush

"I think—tide turning—see, as I remember—I was raised in the desert, but tides kind of—it's easy to see a tide turn—did I say those words?"—Washington, D.C., June 14, 2006

"[T]he illiteracy level of our children are appalling."—Washington, D.C., Jan. 23, 2004

Greetings and Felicitations,

I am not trying to deter the path of the thread but,

I have been looking for the actual piece of federal legislation that banned charging for rape kits. I would like to read the whole thing. Do you perhaps have a link?

Sincerely Yours,
C. David Neely

__________________

Agreed, which is additionally why these series of events bug me. Despite some falsehoods, exaggerations and speculations said about her on some other subjects, what is known to be true is that she has a pretty bad pork record despite her claims to the contrary. For example, she backed the Bridge to Nowhere when running for governor and when Congress killed it given public outrage, she kept and diverted the funds. She hired lobbyists when mayor of Wasilla to get millions in earmarks from Washington for Wasilla, etc. Heck, also reported today, McCain criticised Palin in Wasilla himself back in 2001 for wasteful pork being sent her way:

The CNN Wire: Latest updates on top stories Blog Archive - McCain criticized Wasilla earmarks in 2001 « - Blogs from CNN.com

We're talking megamillions here, much of it already shown to be wasteful spending. But yet, taxpayer frugality was cited for charging rape victims, which would have only cost between 5,000 to 14,000 per year. The megamillion cash differential and sense of priorities on how, where and how much taxpayer money is spent really irks me on this matter.

__________________

One of the first things I read about Palin is that she had apparently gone after wastrels and corrupt politicians (Republican or Democrat) in Alaska with alacrity. I'm wondering how that jives with this new stuff that's coming to light, though nothing in what you're reporting here goes to her being corrupt, it appears - just callous, perhaps, and willing to grab earmarks. What I mean is, if she did actually go after that pork, how did she wind up with the initial reputation of being anti-earmark and a fighter against waste/corruption?

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

HA.HA.HA.--Just exactly how many rapes has the town of Wasilla had? I live in a small town of twice the size of Wasilla, about 15,000--for30 years, & no one has ever filed a charge of rape.

HELLO!--Wassila, Alaska, is not Chicago, D.C., LA or New York City! Rape, would not be top priority in this little town, because rape doesn't happen.

You know, you think you liberal bloggers would give up after a while. YES, let the media report is, so we can show again how biased & utterly ridiculous they are.

PLEASE KEEP IT UP!

Because the McCain campaign, and she, sold herself that way. It wasn't true. Welcome to politics.
Why would that matter. If it was a small amount wouldn't it have been even easier for the town to pay for them? Is your argument that rape victims should have to pay if there's only 10 rapes a year instead of 100. I'd love to see you explain that to those rape victims in person.
Um.....are you serious? Rape doesn't occur there? How can you have charged victims of rape that didn't occur. Please calm down and think.

__________________
Yesterday, John McCain actually said that if he’s president he’ll take on, and I quote, 'the old boys’ network in Washington.' I’m not making this up. This is somebody been in Congress for 26 years, who put seven of the most powerful Washington lobbyists in charge of his campaign. And now he tells us that he’s the one who’s gonna take on the old boys' network,” he said. “In the McCain campaign that’s called a staff meeting!- Obama, 9/17/2008

Here:

Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

__________________

This must be more than just the usual election-year pap flying around, given the rather hysterical use of fonts and bolds in the standard partisan fare above. Zero to hysterics in five seconds flat (not to mention an argument against protecting people from rape because rape might not happen) seems that it could be indicative of an issue or issue perception with some actual ramifications outside of the standard echo chamber.

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

I don't think so. I forget what I referenced, but the biopic and whatnot was written before she got the nod (I recall checking the date). I went to read a bit about her as soon as I heard the announcement.

I'm not saying it has to be valid or isn't valid - just that I don't think this relatively straightforward explanation covers it.

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

Greetings and Felicitations,

Alaska crime rates higher than U.S. average; violence on rise

Now for the real question. Why should it matter how many there were? I don't care. If one victim is charged for helping catch the rapist it is too many. Do you have any idea how callous what you said was. What would be your limit of rapes before we stopped charging the rape victim to obtain evidence to help catch her attacker?

Sincerely Yours,
C. David Neely

__________________