By Susan C. Méndez
There
seems to be no end to the potential human collateral that can be caused by the
United States Congress’s inaction. Along with the delay in renewing the
Violence Against Women Act, recent news coverage has focused on another delay
in reauthorizing the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000
(TVPA). The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime defines human trafficking
as “an act of recruiting, transporting, transferring, harboring or receiving a
person through a use of force, coercion or other means, for the purpose of
exploiting them.” According to a news article by Mounira Al Hmoud in the Times
Argus online, more than 2,500 alleged incidents of human trafficking
were filed between January 1, 2008 and June 30, 2010 in the United States.
About 82% of these reported incidents involved sex trafficking: more than 1,200
incidents involved adult sex trafficking and 1,000 incidents involved child
sexual exploitation. And these are just the reported cases for this time
period. Notably, human traffickers largely target women and children of color.
As such, those who have rose up to speak on this issue are tied closely to this
community. Recently Jada Pinkett Smith and her daughter Willow Smith made the
news with their appearances in Washington, D.C. to talk to government officials
about this issue. Reportedly, more than 2,500 alleged incidents of human
trafficking were filed between January 1, 2008 and June 30, 2010 in the United
States. About 82% of these reported incidents involved sex trafficking: more
than 1,200 incidents involved adult sex trafficking and 1,000 incidents
involved child sexual exploitation. And these are just the reported cases for
this time period.Pinkett Smith founded an anti-trafficking group named “Don’t
Sell Bodies” and sang a song in Spanish entitled “Nada,” whose video highlights
the story of a young woman being trafficked by a love-interest and is directed
by Salma Hayek. It is no coincidence that these key actions which stress the
issue of human trafficking have come from members of the larger women of color
community; such actions and participants are good indicators as to who should
be paying attention to human trafficking. Pinkett Smith and her daughter’s most
recent actions include participating in the Senate Caucus to End Human
Trafficking. Their advocacy on this issue has brought much needed attention
back to the fate of the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of
2000 (TVPA).
This
act, also known as the largest piece of human rights legislation in the United
States, was the first federal law to address comprehensively trafficking as a
crime on both the international and domestic fronts. According to Polaris
Project (a non-profit, non-governmental organization that fights modern day
slavery and human trafficking), the TVPA is composed of three aspects:
“prevention through public awareness programs overseas and a State-department
led monitoring and sanctions program; protection through new T-visa and
services for foreign national victims; and prosecution through new federal
crimes.” This legislation was significant because it created an Office to
Monitor and Combat Trafficking, whose task it is to rank other countries based
on their efforts to halt human trafficking (and the President of the United
States may choose to impose sanctions on countries that do not meet the minimum
standards to end trafficking); established the temporary legal status of
“continued presence” and the new T visa which allows survivors of human
trafficking to stay in the United States temporarily and to apply for permanent
residency after 3 years; and made trafficking a federal crime along with the
new crime of forced labor (individual and corporate employers are the ones
liable to be charged with these crimes). The TVPA of 2000 (P.L. 106-386) was an
astounding act of humanity and compassion; it was reauthorized in 2003 (H.R.
2620), in 2005 (H.R. 972), and in 2008 (H.R. 7311) easily. Its renewal is
purposefully scheduled every two to three years in order to address that fact
that traffickers change their modes of operation periodically. Each time this
act was reauthorized, improvements were made that enhanced the original bill’s
approach to end human trafficking.
Although
various academics, journalists and activists may have differing perspectives on
the impact of human trafficking and the methods and language used to convey
assistance to those who are trafficked, the impetus behind this act appears to
be extending offers of help to those who find themselves to be survivors of
exploitative practices. Consequently, the need for this act still is apparent
and the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2011 (S.1301)
began its renewal process on June 29, 2011 when the act was introduced and
referred to its committee led by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT). Initially, this
Reauthorization Act had 42 Senatorial co-sponsors (it now has 52). According to
Leahy aides, when this committee turned to the House of Representatives, there
was a need to strike a deal and that need has delayed renewal. The Act expired
on September 30, 2011. Mounira Al Hmoud reported for the Times Argus
online that for the past fifteen months, the Trafficking Victims Protection
Reauthorization Act of 2011 has been referred to five different committees of
the House, has undergone significant revision, and has Rep. Christopher Smith
(R-NJ) as its sponsor. An editorial piece in The New York Times, dated
March 21, 2012, explains how these revisions have not always been beneficial.
For example, one revised aspect is the moving of financing for survivors’
services from the Department of Health and Human Services to the Department of
Justice. This shifting makes little sense as the Department of Justice, in
comparison to the Department of Health and Human Services, is not equipped to
deal with the multi-faceted experiences and needs of survivors. Besides
ill-conceived revisions, another detrimental aspect to the stalling of passing
this reauthorization act is the inaccurate application of language used to
discuss human trafficking to prosecute undocumented immigrants in states such
as Arizona where anti-immigrant fervor is strong.
So
what does this act look like now? Where does it stand and what does it have to
do with the Senate Caucus to End Human Trafficking? The aforementioned
editorial in The New York Times also details how in October 2011, a
Senate bill to renew this act through 2015 cleared the Judiciary Committee, yet
has not come to a floor vote. The bill for this act’s renewal cuts
appropriations to 130 million but increases “victim” assistance to $25.5
million. It also has strengthened enforcement measures. The Senate Caucus to
End Human Trafficking is co-chaired by Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and
Robert Portman (R-OH). They aim to engage caucus members in agreeing upon
common goals and creating policies to achieve these goals in the quest to end
human trafficking. There are 13 Senators on this caucus, and it is fitting that
Blumenthal and Portman are co-chairs because in June 2012, they sponsored the
End Trafficking in Government Contracting bill. (In this bill, these two
Senators hoped to change pending defense fund legislation in order to stop
funds for government contractors who employed trafficked laborers.) It is
suspected the work and attention that this caucus will garner can only bring
the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2011 back to both
public and governmental discussion. The caucus has already begun productive
conversation as Jada Pinkett Smith has expressed her hope that the caucus will
establish an advisory council of survivors that can help the government
comprehend the various complexities of human trafficking. It appears good
results can come out of this caucus.
Recent
news reports have restated the need for this act, along with the Violence
Against Women Reauthorization Act, to pass Congress before the end of this year.
However, with much needed attention and work focused on the “fiscal cliff,” the
renewal of these crucial acts seems doubtful and such a delay would be
disastrous for those seeking assistance. The same editorial in The New York
Times describes recent successful efforts made to reach out to survivors of
human trafficking. These efforts include: “a new trafficking hot line, financed
through a grant by health and human services, for instance, [which] has taken
more than 49,000 calls, connected 5,770 potential victims with services and
provided more than 2,155 law-enforcement tips.” Such services are not plentiful
and whatever resources exist to help people who find themselves to be survivors
of exploitative practices like human trafficking should be maintained if not
expanded.
References
Blumenthal, Richard. “Senate Caucus to End Human
Trafficking.” n.p. n.d. Web. 16
November
2012.
Hmoud. Mounira Al. “Leahy Seeks Action on Two
Upcoming Bills.” Times Argus. Times
Argus,
12 November 2012. Web. 12 November 2012.
Polaris Project. Trafficking Victims’
Protection Act (TVPA)-Fact Sheet. Washington: Polaris
Project,
2008. PDF file.
“The Fight Against Modern Day Slavery.” Editorial.
The New York Times 21 March 2012:
A30.
Print.
“Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization
Act of 2011.” Govtrack.us. Civic Impulse,
LLC, n.d. Web. 16
November 2012.
Susan C. Méndez is an Assistant Professor in the
Department of English & Theatre and the Department of Latin American &
Women’s Studies at the University of Scranton. She teaches courses on
Multi-Ethnic American Literature and Women’s Studies. Primarily, she conducts
research on novels written by Latino/a authors.

Thank you for your post, Prof. Méndez. I voted in California last month, and Prop. 35 had to do with human trafficking and penalties. Like most voters uninformed on this measure, I unquestioningly voted YES for increased penalties on those convicted of human trafficking crimes. I soon learned from my progressive colleagues that I should have voted NO. Do you know about this measure and how it affects people of color?
ReplyDelete