Opinion: How Murkowski’s ‘no’ vote on Hegseth confirmation moves the needle on gender-based violence

Sen. Lisa Murkowski was one of three Republican U.S. senators to vote against the confirmation of Pete Hegseth as the U.S. secretary of defense last week, in part because of the allegations of sexual assault and intimate partner abuse made against him. Her vote signals to survivors of gender-based violence (GBV; interpersonal violence like sexual assault, stalking, and intimate partner abuse that are predominantly, but not exclusively, perpetrated by men against women) that they will be believed and that those who have harmed them will be held accountable. Murkowski’s actions are thus critically important and impactful in our collective fight against GBV.

Most Alaskans now seem to recognize that Alaska consistently has the highest rates of GBV in the country, whether we consult victimizations surveys, homicide data or reported rape rates. Alaskans also seem to have widespread agreement that this is a scourge we all want to end. Indeed, Alaska’s top politicians regularly create commissions, raise awareness and champion new policies to try to change these bleak facts.

It is not enough, however, to simply be “against violence.” Moving the needle on this social problem requires a deep soul-searching and recognition of why these rates persist. Part of the answer lies in how we treat survivors who come forward with claims of GBV.

Most crimes do not come to the attention of the police by observation. Instead, crimes have to be reported by the victim or a witness. Thus, for our criminal legal system to begin administering justice, we are heavily reliant on survivor reporting. This is also true for more informal responses to crime: If the person who experienced harm does not share what happened, we as a community cannot respond. Being able to hold perpetrators accountable is essential for GBV prevention, as the certainty of being caught and held accountable is the greatest deterrent of future harm.

It is, therefore, essential that when survivors do come forward with allegations of GBV, we believe them and hold their wrongdoers accountable through criminal-legal means or otherwise (more on this soon). When we mismanage these reports, including expressing disbelief or failing to hold their perpetrators accountable, we not only deter them from reporting in the future, we also deter other current and future survivors from doing so.

Here is where we begin to lose many of our fellow Alaskans who are “against violence.” Often, the protest is that if we can’t prove these allegations beyond a reasonable doubt, then the report could be false and we don’t want to “ruin anyone’s life” without absolute proof. Let’s look at this protest more closely.

The odds are that if someone claims they experienced GBV, they are not lying. Research has consistently found that rates of false reports of GBV are low — most likely well below 10%. Indeed, the act of reporting takes exceptional bravery, as accusers face disbelief, blame, shame, questions regarding their actions and motives, and even threats, which often slows their recovery from an already traumatic experience.

In comparison, there are few benefits to reporting, as the vast majority of perpetrators are not held accountable in criminal court and pursuing civil damages is not an option for the vast majority of survivors. Generally, GBV survivors are taking on a tremendous personal burden to seek justice and prevent others from being victimized by deciding to report. This cost-benefit ratio of reporting leaves very little incentive for someone to make a false report.

Despite the odds against a given report being false, protestors will still lean on criminal law’s strictest standard of proof at this point: “beyond a reasonable doubt.” However, this is only one standard of proof — there are varying criteria to determine whether someone is responsible for an action with even reasonable suspicion being a valid legal standard. We, as a community, can use even lower burdens of proof, as we can hold wrong-doers accountable in a multitude of ways that do not include imposing criminal sanctions on them.

One such sanction is refusing to grant enormous power — power over hundreds of thousands of women serving in our armed forces — to someone who is alleged to have committed GBV. Note that voting “no” to confirm Hegseth is not “ruining his life,” as he is not being sent to prison, marked with a criminal record, or otherwise being held criminally or civilly responsible. It is a lesser social sanction, for which we should be comfortable using a lesser standard of proof.

By voting “no” on Hegseth’s confirmation, Murkowski demonstrated to survivors across Alaska and the country that she will believe them and she will act for them. This gives hope to some that maybe they will be believed when they come forward, and maybe there will be justice for them. We can’t win this battle against GBV without survivors having that faith, so I urge all Alaskans to get on board: Start believing and start holding others accountable like Murkowski did.

Ingrid Johnson, Ph.D., is a survivor of GBV, has more loved ones than she can count who are survivors of GBV in Alaska, and, in her capacity as a University of Alaska faculty, has collected and heard the stories of hundreds of GBV survivors from across the state in the form of research surveys and interviews.

The views expressed here are the writer’s and are not necessarily endorsed by the Anchorage Daily News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)adn.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Read our full guidelines for letters and commentaries here.