Trey Gowdy and Republicans Policy - Essay Example

Trey Gowdy Affiliation Trey Gowdy Harold Watson “Trey” Gowdy III was born in August 22, 1964, and before he became a congressman, he was district attorney for the state’s Seventh Judicial Circuit that comprised of Cherokee and Spartanburg counties. Trey Gowdy is an American Congressman, who is the representative for South Carolina’s 4th Congressional district. He has been a congressman since 2011 where he was elected under the Republican Party. Congressman Gowdy represents much of the Upstate region including Spartanburg and Greenville. He was a federal prosecutor with the United States Attorney for the District of South Carolina from 1994 to 2000. In 2014, he was elected as the Chairman of the House Select Committee to Investigate the Benghazi attack that occurred in 2012. Gowdy is a Baptist, who practices the Christian faith. Gowdy chairs in other committees such as the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and Committee on Judiciary and Committee on Education and Workforce. He also introduced Enforce the Law Act into the House that if accepted by the House would give the United States Senate, and House of Representative the standing to sue the president in the Federal district court to clarify a federal law in case the federal government refuses to enforce the law. Gowdy announced his interest in politics when he announced in the summer of 2009 that he would challenge congressman Bob Inglis an Incumbent Republican in the Republican primary for the South Carolina’s 4th Congressional district. Inglis got a 93% rating from the American Conservative Union that angered the conservative wing of the Republican Party. This was as a result of the stances that he took that were perceived to be more moderate than the ones he had taken when he first represented the district from 1993 to 1999. First, he supported the cap and trade where he stated that he believed that global warming was man made. The negative attitude that Inglis got from his district gave Gowdy a chance to challenge him among other five challengers. Gowdy ran well to Inglis right and in the primary’s that were held in June 2010, he was ranked first with 39% of the vote short of the 50% that was required for the majority threshold to win out rightly without avoiding a run-off. The other challengers got the rest of the votes with Jeffery gathering 7% of the votes. During the run-off elections, Gowdy got 70% of the votes while Inglis got only 30%. The 4th district mostly Republic and after defeating Inglis in the run-off he was sure he would win the congress seat. That was the case because during the election he defeated the Democrat Nominees as he got 63% of the votes. In 2012, Gowdy ran for re-election for the second time against Deb Morrow a Republican with 65%-34% of the votes despite the cut that was made on the map that left Greenville County in the 3rd district. The voting records that Gowdy holds are very conservative in the sense that they are beyond those of South Carolina Republican standards. For example, during the 2011 United States debt-ceiling crisis in August, he voted against the debt-ceiling agreement. Additionally, he opposed the defense authorization bill where he stated that he was concerned about the prospects of Americans being imprisoned without trial on domestic security grounds. He voted yes on banning federal health coverage that includes abortion, abortions for sex or race selection and prohibited federal funding for groups like Planned Parenthood. In 2010, he voted no on adoption of abortion under the case of Roe v Wade and in 2013, he voted no on family planning assistance that includes having an abortion. Congressman Trey wears his votes proudly as his votes speak for the people who elected him in office. The two issues that I would like the congressman to discuss in the House is the issue on violence against women and Health care services and accessibility. Violence against women can be referred to the collective violent acts that are exclusively or primarily committed against women. Violent against women has been identified by the United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women as a manifestation of historically unequal power that is between men and women focusing women in the society into subordinate position compared to men who are their counterparts. Violence against women is categorized broadly because the violence can be carried out by states and individuals (Meyer-Emerick, 2001). Violence against women that is committed by individual includes domestic violence, rape, prenatal sex selection and mob violence among others. Violence against women by the state include sexual slavery, war rape and sexual violence, forced abortion and stoning and flogging among others. Recent statistics by World Health Organization state that 30% of women who have been or are in a relationship have experienced some form of sexual or physical violence. All women have the right to be protected against violence from both the state and individuals. The United States came up with the Violence against Women Act of 1994 Title IV, Sec. 40001-40703 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. The Act provided $ 1.6 billion towards investigation and prosecution of violent crimes against women. Additionally, it imposed mandatory and automatic restitution on those convicted, as well as, allow civil redress in cases that the prosecution chooses to leave un-prosecuted. In 2000 and 2005, the Act was reauthorized by bipartisan majorities in the congress and was signed into Law by President George. W. Bush. In 2012, there was the renewal of the act that was opposed by conservative Republicans including Trey Gowdy on the grounds that they would not extend protection of violence against women to same-sex couple, as well as, provisions that provided for battered illegal immigrants to claim temporary visas. Although there was a long legislative battle throughout 2012-2013, the Violence on Women Act was reauthorized in 2013. I do not agree with the reasoning of conservative Republicans or congressman Gowdy on these issue because the Constitution under the Bill of rights the 14th amendment provides that all individuals are equal so far as they are in the United States territory. For that reason, women should be given a place they can feel free and where they can launch their claims without discrimination. However, when the congressman denied the reauthorization of VAWA he was discriminating against same-sex couples and immigrants. Despite their sexual affiliation or their area of origin they are women, and they need to be protected from abusive partners and states. For example, when women came to seek refuge in the United States and they are running away from their spouses it means that where they are coming from they could not find redress or refuge (Bickerstaff, 2010). Therefore, because even the international law provides for the protection of violence against women the United States should be on the front line to help in addressing such major issues. Women should be protected against these crimes regardless of their origin or sex affiliation and by so doing, the house will be doing something that is beneficial in the society. Additionally, the number of women who face such challenges will decrease. The second issue that I would like the congressman to discuss in the House of Representative is the issues of health care services and accessibility. Health care facilities in the United States are owned and operated by private organization making the access of healthcare hard on people who cannot go to a private institution. About 60-65% of healthcare spending and provision comes from programs such as Medicaid, Tricare, Medicare, the Veterans Health Administration and the Children’s Health Insurance Program. Legislations have been enacted to help in governing and ensuring that there is affordable care. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) was enacted to increase the quality of healthcare and affordability of health insurance, as well as lowering the uninsured rate by expanding both the private and public insurance coverage (Hoffman, 2012). The Act also has the goal of reducing the cost of healthcare for individuals and the government. However, although the law was enacted to help in dealing with issues of health and affordability there are areas of health that are important that have been ignored by these legislations. For example, mental health in the United States is deteriorating each day as people do not have enough insurance cover to help in covering this area of health. Mental health has been associated with high suicides rates in the country, and it has in turn caused a strain in the social and economic systems. The United State Surgeon General reported that the mental illness was the second leading cause of disability that affects about 20% of Americans (Shi & Singh, 2012). The Mental Health Parity Act of 1996, provided for mental care by insurance companies and other financial benefits but they found loopholes around the legislation reducing the amount of money given to patients and hence limiting accessibility to health care. The National Healthcare Disparities report 2011, showed that uninsured, ethnic and racial minorities, as well as, people with a low socioeconomic status have a problem of accessing healthcare in the United States. Therefore, the issue that should be discussed in parliament is what can be done to ensure that this group of people has access to healthcare like all other Americans. This is because attaining good access to care needs three discrete steps and they include gaining entry into the health care system, getting access to sites or places of care where patients receive needed services. Lastly, finding providers who meet the needs of an individual patient and who a patient can develop a relationship that is based on mutual communication and trust. However, this is difficult for patients who leave below a dollar a day because they would rather put food on their table than use more to go to a healthcare facility. For that reason, the government needs to come up with an initiative that helps in building facilities that will enable people from poor or ethnic and racial backgrounds to have accessible healthcare. I agree on congressman Trey Gowdy on the issue of Healthcare as a priority cause it should be focused on the real issues affecting people. Although the government has tried to fund the facilities, politicians have taken that to their advantage to either defund or repeal the Affordable care Act not considering that not all people have the ability to access affordable health care. References Bickerstaff, L. (2010). Violence against women: Public health and human rights. New York: Rosen Pub. Hoffman, B. R. (2012). Health care for some: Rights and rationing in the United States since 1930. Meyer-Emerick, N. (2001). The Violence against Women Act of 1994: An analysis of intent and perception. Westport, Conn. [u.a.: Praeger. Shi, L., & Singh, D. A. (2012). Delivering health care in America: A systems approach. Sudbury, Mass: Jones & Bartlett Learning. Read More