By John Gramlich, CQ Staff

Thirty-six House Republicans, including Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith, Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy and nearly all of the women in the conference, are cosponsoring a bill to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act, signaling broad support for a measure that departs from the version the Senate passed on April 26.

Rep. Sandy Adams, a Florida Republican, is the lead sponsor of the House bill (HR 4970), which, among other changes, would enhance criminal penalties for sexual assault, require more grant programs to be audited and devote more money to reducing a backlog of untested DNA samples in the hopes of solving open rape investigations.

Democrats in the Senate defeated all of those provisions when that chamber considered its reauthorization (S 1925) last week.

The House bill also would eliminate Senate language that supporters say would do more to help victims of domestic violence including gays and lesbians, immigrants and American Indians. Adams considers those provisions unnecessary, a spokeswoman said. “The grants are available to all victims, and there is no evidence to conclude that victims are being turned away,” said spokeswoman Lisa Boothe in an email.

The backing of Smith, of Texas, and California’s McCarthy signals the House measure is on a fast track to passage — and a showdown with the Senate.

The Judiciary Committee will mark up the measure when it returns from recess the week of May 7, and the full House will take it up the following week. Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., has telegraphed his own support for the bill, appearing at a news conference alongside Adams when she announced she would sponsor the legislation.

In all, 19 of the 24 Republican women in the House support the bill, suggesting the House majority plans to challenge Democratic claims that their legislation sells women short. Republicans contend their bill will do more than the Senate measure to curb government waste and crack down on sex criminals.

Adams’ bill would make a conviction of aggravated sexual assault by force punishable by a new mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years in prison, compared with five years under a Republican amendment added to the Senate-passed measure during a committee markup. The House bill also would create a five-year mandatory minimum sentence for aggravated sexual assault by “other means,” such as the use of drugs to render a victim unconscious. The Senate version includes no such provision.

More than 50 groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, the NAACP and the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, warned against the inclusion of mandatory minimum sentences during the Senate debate. Those groups are likely to voice more objections to the House language .

“We do not believe . . . that new mandatory minimum sentencing laws are an appropriate or cost-effective way to combat violence against women,” the organizations wrote in a letter to Senate leaders April 25. “The best way to punish violent offenders is to permit courts to consider the individual circumstances of each offense and offender, and to impose a proportionate sentence. We have no confidence that one-size-fits-all sentencing schemes will provide the degree of individualized justice the American public deserves and expects.”

Senate Democrats say mandatory minimum sentences “can have a chilling effect on the reporting and prosecution of crime, particularly domestic and sexual violence offenses that involve offenders closer to the victim,” a staff analysis of the Senate bill (S 1925) found.

Adding language on mandatory minimums, which many Democrats oppose, “feels political,” one Senate Democratic aide said of the House measure. “They’re putting stuff in there that makes it hard for Democrats to vote for it,” the aide said.

The House legislation also differs from the Senate version by escalating maximum criminal penalties for cyberstalking. That would give judges more room to impose tougher sentences if they wish.