Part Two of a Two Part Post.
I first became aware of this terrible amendment on the morning of Saturday August 3, 2013 and immediately put up a post about it.
I spent the majority of yesterday getting the correct names for all the appropriate Virginia Representatives, House Foreign Affairs Committee and Senate Foreign Affairs Committee contacts and now I’m sharing the fruit of that labor with you.
Below is a copy of the message I sent out to every lawmaker in the above three groups.
Feel free to use it as a sample letter/email. Copy as little or as much of it as you like. Or if you prefer compose a brand new message of your own, that’s even better. Just as long as you contact these Federal lawmakers in the month of August before they return from their summer break (in September) when they plan then vote on HR2848.
I do suggest including in the message to your district’s Virginia Congressman mentioning in the very first sentence that you are a constituent.
Mary D. Devoy
On August 1, 2013 (one day after this bill was filed) New Jersey Congressman Chris Smith submitted an amendment in the House Foreign Affairs Committee to HR2848- Department of State Operations and Embassy Security Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 2014 and the amendment and bill were unanimously approved.
This Smith amendment does NOT belong in HR2848!
Representative Smith’s maneuver to tack on his 6 year-old International Megan’s Law (IML) Bill as an amendment to an Embassy Security bill is disgusting. Clearly no
U.S. Lawmaker would ever vote against a bill
that is to enhance or fund the security of our foreign embassies especially
after the 2012
incident plus this week’s closure of 19 foreign embassies due to a
HR2848 is obviously on a fast-track and Congressman Smith is capitalizing or perhaps exploiting that fact.
For 6 years Congressman Smith has unsuccessfully attempted to mandate a restriction and/or revocation of the passports of
Registered Sex Offenders. U.S.
2010: HR5138Still pending for 2013 HR898
Not to forget Representative Ted Poe’s similar attempt in 2010 with HR5870.
All of the “IML” bills have failed up to this point for very good reasons.
Most of the versions have swept up anyone convicted of a sexual offense that is required to register, then there have been iterations where it’s anyone convicted of a “crime against a minor” or my favorite the vague description of “high interest offenders”. Legislation that is left open for interpretation, leads to confusion, high costs and unintended sweeping mandates. Proposed legislation need to be well written, specific, based on facts and proven data and most of all meaningful, this Smith amendment is none of those.
Back in 2010 the Congressional Budget Office estimated that it would cost the American taxpayers $252 million from 2011-2015 to implement the International Megan’s Law.