Marjorie Taylor Greene votes against human trafficking bill after accusing Democrats of doing nothing to protect victims
20 House Republicans vote against reauthorisation of federal programmes to combat trafficking
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Far-right US Rep Marjorie Taylor Greene was among 20 Republicans in the US House of Representatives to vote against a bill that reauthorises federal programmes to combat human trafficking.
The Georgia congresswoman cast her vote on 26 July hours after accusing Democratic lawmakers of failing to combat trafficking and the deaths of migrants along the US-Mexico border.
“How can anyone who voted for Democrats not be offended by this?” she wrote on Twitter. “Dems said they care about children in cages [and] migrants, yet migrants are dying everyday, women are raped, and kids are being trafficked.”
“All while Dems send $54+ billion to defend Ukraine’s border and NOT our own,” she added, referencing congressional legislation to support Ukraine against the ongoing Russian assault.
The Frederick Douglass Trafficking Victims Prevention and Protection Reauthorization Act of 2022 passed the House on Wednesday by a vote of 401-20. Eight Republicans and one Democratic lawmaker did not vote.
The measure allocates more than $1.1bn over five years to bolster programmes created under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, including shelters, mental health support, education and job training, among other efforts, according to a bill summary.
It also reauthorises the US Department of Homeland Security’s Angel Watch Center to combat international sex tourism travel by convicted child sex offenders. The bill also aims to improve trafficking prevention education for children and their families.
The legislation also would boost funding for housing survivors.
Other Republicans who voted against the measure include Florida Republican Matt Gaetz, who is reportedly facing a federal investigation over trafficking allegations involving a 17-year-old girl. He has strenuously denied the accusations.
In a statement explaining his vote, the congressman said that “the government’s failure to accurately and specifically define human trafficking allows this legislation to act as a backdoor loophole for illegal immigration and amnesty” while the bill “costs over half a billion dollars to implement and gives more taxpayer money to overfunded, inefficient grant programs.”
“Human traffickers never take a holiday, nor can we,” bill co-author and New Jersey congressman Chris Smith said in a statement following the vote. “Because traffickers and the nefarious networks they lead always find new ways to exploit the vulnerable, especially women and children, we must aggressively strengthen laws and their implementation.”
He said the largely overwhelming bipartisan support for the bill, despite 20 GOP opponents, “is a testament to a widespread consensus and underscores the absolute urgency for securing the funds needed to protect victims, prosecute perpetrators and prevent trafficking from occurring in the first place.”
Subscribe to Independent Premium to bookmark this article
Want to bookmark your favourite articles and stories to read or reference later? Start your Independent Premium subscription today.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments