John on January 11, 2006 at 10:41 am
This story from the Baptist Press covers the President’s signing of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act yesterday. The story notes that:
In its annual Trafficking in Persons report in June, the State Department provided the following statistics on the global problem:
- An estimated 600,000 to 800,000 people are trafficked across international borders yearly, not including millions who are traded within their own country.
- About 80 percent of these victims are females, and 50 percent are underage.
- About $9.5 billion is generated annually by human trafficking, ranking it behind only arms and drugs as a source of profits for organized crime globally, according to the Congressional Research Service.
The bill addresses all types of human traffiicking but is aimed primarily at sex slavery. Flanked by Secretary Rice and AG Gonzales, Bush gave a six minute speech at the signing in which he used the “e-word” twice. Here’s a sample:
Human traffickers operate with greed and without conscience, treating their victims as nothing more than goods and commodities for sale to the highest bidder. In recent years, hundreds of thousands of people around the world have been trafficked against their will, across international boundaries, and many have been forced into sexual servitude. Thousands of teenagers and young girls are trafficked into the United States every year. They’re held hostage. They’re forced to submit to unspeakable evil. America has a particular duty to fight this horror because human trafficking is an affront to the defining promise of our country.
All of which makes one wonder why the Baptist Press has the best coverage of this story. One would think the use of the word evil alone would make this big news. But although the bill was signed into law yesterday, the NY Times has so far only run this minimalist three paragraph AP story. The WaPost ran the same lame piece. As far as I can tell, the LA Times didn’t run anything at all.
I realize the Alito hearings are sucking all the air out of the room, but I can’t help thinking this has spike written all over it. At a time when the Dems are desperately trying to paint Alito as an “anti-choice extremist” put forward by an anti-woman administration, highlighting Bush’s signing of a law that protects women and children probably doesn’t fit the script.
Another possible reason for the silence from the MSM may be that a key person behind this law is Donna Hughes, a professor at the University of Rhode Island. She has a PhD in genetics and has spent years speaking and writing about women’s issues, human trafficking and sex slavery in particular. Of course with those qualifications (New England University, PhD in science, women’s issues) you’d think she’d be a leftist, right? Wrong. She is a recurring contributor to National Review, making her possibly the lone conservative at URI.
All in all, this is an important law on an important issue which should be a big win for the President and for conservatives (and evangelicals) who’ve pushed the issue. Instead, we get crickets chriping from the MSM. Curious, that. Then again, if this were to get attention how long could it be until the ACLU sued to stop the government from domestic spying on international pimps?
Category: MSM & Bias |