LIFE Today
A number of groups recently sent a letter to GOP leaders in the House of Representatives encouraging them to quash a bill meant to repeal the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), a panel of 15 unelected bureaucrats empowered to make cuts to Medicare when spending exceeds targeted growth rates.
The signers argue that if the health law is taken apart piecemeal, focus on the ultimate goal — the ACA’s full repeal — will dissipate. Americans will be stuck with most of this harmful law, indefinitely.
Although the signers’ intentions appear pure and their goal admirable, they fail to see that the immediate danger posed to seniors by the IPAB’s creation in 2015 is simply too great to ignore in hopes of the ACA’s full repeal.
As the letter rightly points out, IPAB will essentially mean rationed care for our nation’s seniors. The 15 officials who will make up the board will not only be empowered to make what is expected to be billions of dollars’ worth of cuts to Medicare every year, but will be required to do so when spending exceeds targeted rates. IPAB’s recommended cuts will become law unless a supermajority in Congress vetoes the board’s proposal and creates its own cost-cutting proposal of equal size — an unlikely scenario even in the most harmonious of political times.
Due to the ACA’s restrictions on IPAB’s cost-cutting methods, the board is expected to focus on minimizing payments provided to doctors who serve Medicare patients. However it is no longer financially viable for many physicians to serve Medicare patients as it is, and such cuts would exacerbate a Medicare-doctors shortage that is already affecting patients’ access to care throughout the country.
While this form of rationing would most certainly be harmful to patients who need dependable doctors, a far worse form of rationing could be close behind. For example, IPAB may eventually be allowed to resort to Great Britain’s chosen rationing methods and refuse to provide certain effective treatments to patients who need them based on costs and patients’ remaining “quality adjusted life years.” Though the law currently forbids IPAB from engaging in such behavior, there is little reason to believe these rules won’t be changed — or at least stretched — down the road as costs continue to balloon and political dynamics change.
If the ACA had honestly addressed fundamental problems in Medicare instead of focusing on harmful and ineffective “band-aid” fixes like IPAB, such worries would not concern us today. But the law’s authors put politics over patients and hurried a flawed and unpopular bill though the legislative process. Now, years later, more seniors are beginning to understand that IPAB’s creation and the $500 billion in cuts to the Medicare program meant to help pay for the law were anything but helpful to them.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/19/repeal-ipab-now/#ixzz1pnTPa9th
The Georgia Supreme Court on Monday unanimously struck down a key provision of a state law that criminalized some assisted suicides, finding it violates free speech rights.
The court’s ruling means that four members of the Final Exit Network do not have to stand trial on felony charges in Forsyth County in connection with the 2008 suicide of 58-year-old John Celmer, who killed himself two years after he had been diagnosed with cancer.
The state Legislature passed the law in 1994 to punish people like the late Jack Kevorkian, the Michigan pathologist known as “Dr. Death.” He catapulted to fame in the early 1990s by overseeing the suicides of more than 100 people, prompting a number of states to criminalize assisted suicide.
The state Supreme Court said Georgia’s law is unconstitutional because it does not prohibit all assisted suicides and, instead, criminalizes only those in which someone advertises or offers to assist in a suicide and then takes steps to help carry it out.
“The State has failed to provide any explanation or evidence as to why a public advertisement or offer to assist in an otherwise legal activity is sufficiently problematic to justify an intrusion on protected speech rights,” Justice Hugh Thompson wrote for the court.
“Had the state truly been interested in the preservation of human life … it could have imposed a ban on all assisted suicides with no restriction on protected speech whatsoever,” Thompson wrote. “Alternatively, the state could have sought to prohibit all offers to assist in suicide when accompanied by an overt act to accomplish that goal. The state here did neither.”
Ted Goodwin, Final Exit’s former president and a defendant in the Forsyth case, called the ruling “a bittersweet victory.”
“I’m saddened by what we’ve been put through,” he said. “I’m also sad for all the people who would have benefited from our compassionate presence at their life’s bitter end over the last three years.”
Goodwin said once the charges are formally dismissed, “We’ll move forward again as activists in our movement.”
Forsyth District Attorney Penny Penn said if the law had survived the constitutional challenge, she was confident she could have won convictions against the four defendants for Celmer’s suicide.
“They behave irresponsibly and prey on people who are vulnerable,” Penn said. “John Celmer wasn’t terminally ill. He had cancer, but it was in remission.”
Penn noted that another key provision of the law that makes it a crime to prey on someone’s fears, affections or sympathies to get them to commit suicide is still on the books. But she called on state lawmakers to try once again to write a new statute that criminalizes the work of organizations like the Final Exit Network.
“They weren’t discouraged or deterred when there were laws in place, so think what they’ll do now,” Penn said.
A key state lawmaker, Rich Golick, a Smyrna Republican who chairs the House Judiciary Non-Civil Committee, said he anticipates the General Assembly will consider new assisted-suicide legislation this session.
In 2010, a Forsyth grand jury indicted Goodwin; anaesthesiologist Lawrence Egbert, who co-founded the group; regional coordinator Nicholas Alex Sheridan; and group member Claire Blehr.
They were charged with violating the assisted-suicide law, racketeering and tampering with evidence. Because the provision of the assisted-suicide law was struck down, the entire case will be dismissed, Penn said.
During pretrial hearings, defense lawyers challenged the constitutionality of the law. A Forsyth judge upheld the law, and they appealed to the state Supreme Court.
Don Samuel, who represents Final Exit and Egbert, said when the state Supreme Court unanimously strikes down a statute, “there should be little doubt that the state Legislature should do a better job. This statute outlawed speech, pure and simple, and that’s something the law cannot do. If the Legislature wants to go back and make all assisted suicides a crime, there are dozens of state laws they can pattern it after.”
In 1997, the U.S. Supreme Court said states could enact laws banning assisted suicide. Only three states — Oregon, Washington and Montana — legalize it.
– Staff writer Christopher Quinn contributed to this article.
Last spring, Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards went on CNN and claimed that if Congress cut off funding to Planned Parenthood “millions of women are going to lose access, not to abortion services, to basic family planning, you know, mammograms.” But as pro-life activist Lila Rose documented in a video, Planned Parenthood does not provide mammograms.
This story is worth recalling in light of the news this week that the Susan G. Komen foundation, one of the nation’s largest breast cancer charities, has cut off funding (more than $600,000) to Planned Parenthood. Cecile Richards wrote that the foundation’s decision to “end its support of lifesaving breast cancer screening at Planned Parenthood health centers comes as a blow to women across America.”
But as Nancy Brinker, founder and CEO of Komen foundation, says in a video, Komen came out with a new set of standards this year designed to free up dollars for “higher impact programs.”
“Wherever possible, we want to grant to the provider that is actually providing the lifesaving mammogram,” she said.
Now obviously Planned Parenthood’s role as America’s largest abortion practitioner seems to be a significant factor in Komen’s decision. Many Americans who would like to fund breast cancer research without lining the pockets of abortionists have pushed Komen to end its Planned Parenthood grants in recent years.
But why does Planned Parenthood feel entitled to a private charity’s donations, especially considering the fact that Planned Parenthood’s president falsely claims on national television that the group provides mammograms? Isn’t Komen free to give its money to organizations that do more than provide mammogram “referrals” and breast cancer screenings?
In the end, Komen’s decision to cut less than $1 million isn’t going to do much to hurt Planned Parenthood’s bottom line. The “non-profit” is worth more than $1 billion, as Charlotte Allen noted in her WEEKLY STANDARD cover story, “Planned Parenthood’s Unseemly Empire.” During the 2004-2005 fiscal year, Planned Parenthood president Gloria Feldt raked in over $900,000, and Planned Parenthood made $155 million in 2009 alone by performing more than 322,000 abortions. It has already raised hundreds of thousands of dollars as part of a backlash against Komen (pro-lifers are now rallying to Komen’s side). Planned Parenthood is not hurting for cash.
But Komen’s decision is an important symbolic blow to Planned Parenthood, which likes to say its mission is about more than performing abortions and providing contraception. It claims that only 3 percent of its services are abortions, but that claim is incredibly misleading. Abortions made up 38% of Planned Parenthood’s clinic revenues in 2009. From 2000 to 2009, abortions performed by Planned Parenthood jumped from 197,000 to 332,000. During that same time, adoption referrals dropped from 2,486 to 977. Protecting abortion-on-demand remains Planned Parenthood’s highest priority–the organization has even shown itself willing to cover up statutory rape time and time again in order to “protect women’s rights.”
Planned Parenthood has tried to diversify its portfolio so it isn’t publicly identified and isolated as simply the biggest part of the abortion industry. Planned Parenthood will no longer be able to rely on the Komen foundation to help it pretend it is something that it is not.
Another layer to the depth of the Sebelius abortion corruption has been revealed with today’s AP report that Kansas health department (KDHE) in 2005 destroyed the state late-term abortion reports at the heart of the felony charges against Planned Parenthood.
The pre-trial hearing for felony “false-writing” charges had been scheduled for Monday Oct. 24, Since the original reports have now been discovered as destroyed, the Johnson County District attorney’s office had asked for a delay so they could engage other witnesses to verify the authenticity of copies of the state reports.
The state reports are verifications that abortionists send to KDHE for statistical purposes, and are annually tabulated and published. Copies of those reports are required to be kept in the patient medical files. Of crucial importance is that these reports fail to provide valid medical reasons that banned post-viability abortions were performed. They are evidence of illegal abortion.
KFL Executive Director, Mary Kay Culp, said, “Only guilty people destroy evidence; not even we anticipated Sebelius and her administration could stoop this low to protect abortion industry criminality, but this proves they did. Sebelius wanted to insure that evidence of illegal abortions was removed before Kline could use it to convict her abortion industry campaign supporters. We truly can’t find words to adequately convey how outrageous this is. We are especially incredulous given that Sebelius’ Health department testified about these reports in Johnson County court in 2008 without once mentioning that the reports had been destroyed! It’s all so unbelievable, and yet, given the players, so very believable indeed!”
Planned Parenthood tells the AP that they “recently” became aware of the destruction and that it was not done at their request. What is not yet known is
1) when exactly Planned Parenthood knew;
2) whether paper copies or electronic files—or both—were destroyed;
3) who actually did the deed and under what orders;
4) whether other reports from George Tiller were destroyed;
5) whether similar reports in other years have been destroyed.
Background
It was the tumultuous 2006 re-election campaign of both Gov. Sebelius and AG Phill Kline when the slogan of ‘abortion privacy invasion’ was honed by the state abortion cartel. Although highly embarrassing mental health files and other “sensitive” medical records are routinely subpoenaed by prosecutors without confidentiality problems, much ado had made of Kline’s subpoenas of late-term abortion files. Notably —to this day—not one woman’s identity has been revealed from any of the files he subpoenaed.
In Feb. 2005–after over-accommodating the stalling tactics of the Planned Parenthood and George Tiller abortion clinics– the State Supreme Court ruled that Kline’s subpoenas of late-term abortion files could be obtained. Files from both clinics for patients in 2003 were sent to Judge Richard Anderson for redaction prior to use in prosecution.
When Anderson’s assistant was reviewing the reports from both clinics, he found that Planned Parenthood patient files were missing the state reports. After notification, Planned Parenthood submitted some report copies, but they appeared doctored. Anderson had them examined by an independent forgery expert, confirming the strong probability that Planned Parenthood had committed felony “false-writings” to coverup the misdemeanor of failing to make and keep the proper state reports.
It is these Johnson County felony charges for forging documents that Kline tried to prosecute when he became Johnson County District Attorney in 2007. At that time, the KDHE under Gov. Sebelius, opposed bringing the original reports to court, saying that a certain law 65-445, only permitted them to be shared with the AG. The AG was then Steve Six, who not only would NOT accommodate the Kline prosecution of Planned Parenthood, he was also helping the abortion clinics sue Kline!
AG Six also convinced the state Supreme Court to prevent Anderson from testifying about the falsified reports. When Kline appealed that ruling, the Court –after a 15 month delay– said the judge could only testify in a limited way, and not to verify the “chain of possession” of the state reports.
Kline vilified to hide Sebelius abortion corruption
Kline pursued the state reports as part of his intended prosecution of Kansas late-term abortion corruption. Sebelius tried hard to stop him, even trying to use a restraining order from Judge Thomas Marten in the Aid for Women case. Judge Anderson ignored those efforts, and found probable cause of criminality, allowing Kline to subpoena the state reports in 2004.
This left state reports “reachable” by Kline—reports that show abortion clinics did not have defendable reasons for post-viability abortions. So they destroyed the reports.
This same Sebelius/state Supreme Court/ abortion cartel trio wants Kline completely destroyed! An ethics panel currently convened under the Court has blamed Phill Kline of violating ethics by “deception of a state agency” for not revealing his investigation to the Sebelius administration. The claim is ridiculous on its face, and Judge Owens expressly said Kline was justified, but notice that Sebelius WAS untrustworthy and wanted every vulnerability taken care of for her abortion industry supporters.
Numerous attorneys for Sebelius and her health department are the ones who should face ethics charges. KDHE testified to a special legislative committee in 2007, and numerous times to Johnson County judges and the state Supreme Court about these matters and never told them the reports were destroyed.
Legislation not expected to be voted on in Senate (Jim Abrams, Associated Press, 10/14/11)
WASHINGTON (AP) — The House on Thursday returned to an abortion issue that nearly sank President Barack Obama’s health care law last year with legislation that bars an insurance plan regulated under the new law from covering abortion if any of its customers receive federal subsidies.
Providers that offer abortion coverage would have to set up identical plans without abortion coverage to participate in the health insurance exchanges to be set up under the new law.
The legislation, which passed 251-172, is unlikely to be considered by the Democratic-led Senate and faces a veto threat from President Barack Obama. But it gives House Republicans a chance to reaffirm their credentials on social conservative issues.
Supporters of the bill, including author Rep. Joe Pitts, R-Pa., say they are trying to close loopholes in the health care act that could lead to violations of the longstanding prohibition of the federal funding of abortion.
Opponents warn that millions of middle- and low-income women who receive partial subsidies to buy insurance would be denied abortion coverage.
The legislation also strengthens conscience protections for anti-abortion health care providers. Again there is divergence between bill supporters saying they are merely clarifying existing law and opponents saying it will lead to hospitals denying emergency care to pregnant women.
The legislation revives the debate that almost scuttled the health care act. Former Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Menominee, leading a rebellion of anti-abortion Democrats, joined Pitts in pushing through an amendment that imposed tight restrictions on abortions in the proposed government-run insurance plan. When the Senate wouldn’t go along, Stupak got Obama to sign an executive order reaffirming the Hyde Amendment, a 1976 provision named after the late Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill., that bans all federal funds for abortion except in cases of rape, incest and when the life of the mother is at risk.
Pitts argued that the executive order can be rescinded at any time and the new health care act is not bound to follow the Hyde Amendment. But the White House, in issuing its veto threat, said the health care law preserves the ban on federal funding and the legislation “intrudes on women’s reproductive freedom and access to health care and unnecessarily restricts the private insurance choices that women and their families have today.”
North Carolina has become the third state to de-fund the Planned Parenthood abortion business now that both houses of the state legislature have agreed to override pro-abortion Gov. Bev Perdue’s budget veto.
The state legislature approved a measure to remove federal funds from the pro-abortion organization in its state budget. In North Carolina, the abortion business receives $434,000 through state family planning programs aimed at reducing teen pregnancies and providing birth control. Although the money can only be used for non-abortion services, the same organization is also the nation’s largest abortion business — doing more than 330,000 annually and comprising more than one-quarter of all abortions in the United States annually.
The provision would have North Carolina follow Indiana in declining to fund Planned Parenthood through the family planning program authorized under Medicaid. Indiana currently faces a lawsuit from Planned Parenthood and North Carolina could face one as well if the de-funding provision eventually becomes law under the state budget.
After the state House voted to override the veto, House Speaker Thom Tillis said “We think we’ve done something historic on several different levels” according to the Greensboro News-Record. Senate President Pro Tempore Phil Berger, also a Republican, told the newspaper the state Senate would follow suit today and it did just that.
Republicans hold 31 seats in the 50-seat state Senate and that proved to be more than enough for the override.
Following the vote, the Planned Parenthood abortion business criticized state legislators because the budget provision “would effectively end state and federal funding for Planned Parenthood.”
Paige Johnson, Vice-President of Public Policy with Planned Parenthood of Central North Carolina glossed over the abortions the business does and tried to cast the vote as opposing women’s health care, even though women have many other options available in the state for legitimate health care at low or no cost.
“The continued misleading attacks on Planned Parenthood expose a cynical and coldhearted willingness to further a divisive political agenda even if it will deny women access to lifesaving preventive healthcare,” Johnson claimed.
Melissa Reed, Vice-President of Public Policy with Planned Parenthood Health Systems, threatened a lawsuit if the Senate upholds the veto override.
“Planned Parenthood in North Carolina is considering all options—including litigation—to protect the health care needs of our patients, particularly low-income women and families,” she said.
North Carolina is the third state to bar Planned Parenthood from participating in taxpayer funded programs. Thus far, state legislatures in Indiana and Kansas have passed such provisions, and the respective governors have signed them into law.
An April poll conducted by the Polling Company and WomanTrend reveals a majority of Americans, 54 percent, oppose giving tax dollars for family planning services to organizations that perform abortions. The poll also shows the intensity of this position, with 43 percent “strongly” opposing any federal funds going to abortion providers such as Planned Parenthood, while just 20 percent “strongly” support federal funds going to abortion businesses.
Kellyanne Conway, the president of the Polling Company firm said the support for de-funding Planned Parenthood crosses lines on the abortion debate.
“Even 26 percent of pro-choice adherents rejected diverting taxpayer dollars for family planning organizations that provide abortions,” Conway said. “Some Americans may have positive attitudes toward Planned Parenthood, but may also reject the underlying premise that federal funding for family planning organizations should be fungible for abortions.”
Breaking down the results further, the poll found 82 percent of those who say they are pro-life responded yes when asked, “Do you support or oppose tax dollars for family planning services going to organizations that perform abortions?” Another 26 percent of people who say they are “pro-choice” on abortion agreed. Some 12 percent of pro-life people support funding Planned Parenthood while 70 percent of those “pro-choice” do.
The poll also found women opposed funding Planned Parenthood on a 51-40 percent margin, Hispanics opposed funding 47-45 percent, blacks opposed funding 62-26 percent, independents opposed funding 52-36, while 18-34 year-old respondents opposed Planned Parenthood funding on a 54-38 percent margin. People living in the South opposed funding the most.
Measure on fast track, now moves to House floor
RALEIGH — Is pregnancy punishment? Is the process of getting an abortion comparable to refinancing a mortgage? Do abortion providers disproportionately target African-American women? Those were some of the questions bandied about for two hours Wednesday morning before a House judiciary subcommittee gave its stamp of approval to a contentious informed-consent abortion bill.
The legislation — House Bill 854, Abortion-Woman’s Right to Know Act — passed by a party line 9-5 vote and now goes to the House floor. Republicans have enough support in both chambers to pass it, although a veto from Democratic Gov. Bev Perdue is likely.
Among other components, the proposed law would require a 24-hour waiting period before an abortion, an ultrasound image of the unborn child, and notarized parental consent for a minor’s abortion. Pro-lifers say the bill would save thousands of unborn lives each year.
Most of the measure’s provisions remained intact, with two exceptions. In the first instance, bill sponsors opted to eliminate requirements that physicians report the number of women who avail themselves of material on abortion risks, or who opted to view the ultrasound image.
In the second instance, sponsors nixed the phrase “the life of each human being begins at conception,” and “abortion will terminate the life of a separate, unique living human being,” from printed information that would be offered to abortion-minded women.
Emotions run high
Before taking a vote, committee members heard a wide-ranging debate between physicians, religious leaders, and post-abortive women on the merits of the bill.
Heather Kay, a woman who chose abortion in 2006 due to her unborn child’s severe brain damage, said that H.B. 854 would have imposed burdensome steps in the way of a decision she already had made.
“It’s a slippery slope when lawmakers start specifying the who, what, where, when, and how of the most personal decision a woman will have to make,” Kay said. “The only people that should be involved in any portion of this decision-making process are a woman and her physicians.”
Others pointed to the medical and psychological risks of abortion as justification for more thorough informed-consent standards. Martha Shuping, a psychiatrist, said she personally had treated hundreds of women suffering from mental health problems in the wake of an abortion.
“The women who come to me say they wish they had received better information about the risks before they made their abortion decision,” Shuping said. “One North Carolina woman told me that she received better informed consent when her dog had surgery compared to what she received when she had her abortion.”
Marty McCaffrey, a neonatologist and associate professor of pediatrics at UNC-Chapel Hill, testified about the link between abortion and subsequent risk of pre-term births in women. “The truth is that if abortions were bananas, they would be covered with surgeon general warnings,” he said.
Race also entered the debate when Rev. Johnny Hunter, national director of the pro-life African-American group LEARN, raised a documentary on abortions in the black community.
“We’re tired of being fooled. Anybody who has no problem killing a baby has no problem killing off black folks,” he said.
Members’ row
After an hour of testimony, committee members got their say, and some used the hearing as an opportunity to soapbox on the finer points of the abortion debate that’s raged for four decades.
Democrats complained that the bill would be too costly — financially, that is. Official estimates put the price tag at $6.8 million next year, a figure that encompasses Medicaid costs associated with caring for the unborn children who would be born, rather than aborted, if the legislation passes.
Republicans decried inserting finances into the discussion. “With the budget that we put together, I have no doubt that if we have to spend $6.7 million next year because more children are born, then we can do it,” said Rep. Justin Burr, R-Stanly.
Rep. Alice Borden, D-Alamance, suggested the bill was more about repressing woman than abortion. Having women be unable to terminate their pregnancy “is the goal” and an effort to return to times past when “pregnancy was punishment” for careless sex, Bordsen said.
Some Democrats objected to the time delay caused by providing women with additional information. House Majority Leader Paul “Skip” Stam, R-Wake, admitted there would be a delay, but he compared the process to government requirements for people seeking to refinance their homes.
A few minutes before members took a final vote, Rep. Grier Martin, D-Wake, walked out of the hearing, leaving five Democrats to vote against the bill.
David N. Bass is an associate editor of Carolina Journal.
ACTION: Contact your North Carolina legislators at http://www.ncga.state.nc.us and urge support for de-funding Planned Parenthood.
WASHINGTON (BP)–The House of Representatives approved March 15 another measure to extend funding of federal agencies in the short term, but support by conservative Republicans dropped considerably.
The House voted 271-158 for the continuing resolution, which — if approved by the Senate — will maintain spending for federal programs through April 8 and avert a government shutdown for the time being. On March 1, the House voted 335-91 for a continuing resolution that is in effect through March 18.
While only six Republicans opposed the March 1 resolution, 54 GOP members voted against the latest proposal. In explaining their votes against the measure, the new opponents cited their desire not to delay addressing the country’s financial problems, as well as the short-term bill’s failure to bar government funding of abortion.
Rep. Mike Pence, R.-Ind., told his colleagues from the House floor he would oppose the continuing resolution. “Things don’t change in Washington until they have to,” Pence said. “It’s time to pick a fight.”
Some pro-life and pro-family organizations also called for Congress to provide a long-term solution.
“These watered-down continuing resolutions just kick the can down the road to avoid an inevitable showdown that must take place between the Republicans who were elected in near record numbers in the 2010 election to go to Washington and cut the budget — and to cut it drastically — with the establishment Democrats in the House and the Senate who don’t think we should cut government at all,” said Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission.
On Feb. 19, the GOP-controlled House approved a conservative-backed continuing resolution that would have extended appropriations through the rest of the fiscal year, which expires Sept. 30, in a 235-189. That legislation would have cut about $61 billion from last year’s spending level. The Democrat majority in the Senate, however, voted down the House-approved bill. That longer-term continuing resolution contained several provisions eliminating federal funding of abortion and abortion performers, including one championed by Pence that barred money for Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) and its affiliates, a network that constitutes the country’s No. 1 abortion provider.
That continuing resolution was an “important first step toward turning our national government back in the direction of fiscal discipline, defunding Obamacare and even restoring the sanctity of life to the center of the federal budget. But it was rejected by liberals in the Senate,” Pence said.
Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the pro-life Susan B. Anthony List, opposed the three-week resolution, saying, “If Congress can’t cut off taxpayer dollars to Planned Parenthood, a willing partner of the exploitation of women and young girls, how can it be serious about cutting spending anywhere else? The time to end taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood is not next week, or in three weeks, or in a month; it’s now.”
Planned Parenthood and its affiliates received $363.2 million in government grants and contracts during the 2008-09 fiscal year, the most recent year for which statistics are available. Some of that total came from state and local governments. Planned Parenthood — which recently issued new rules requiring at least one clinic per affiliate to perform abortions — recorded more than 332,000 abortions at its clinics in 2009.
Hidden-camera investigations in recent years have shown Planned Parenthood employees indicating a willingness to assist sex traffickers of minor girls and to cover up sexual abuse of underage females.
Also included in the continuing resolution through September were such pro-life measures as:
– Reinstatement of the Mexico City Policy, which would bar federal money for organizations that perform or promote abortions overseas.
– Restoration of a ban on funds for the United Nations Population Fund, which has been found to support China’s coercive population control program.
– Reinstitution of a prohibition on the use of federal and congressionally approved local funds for elective abortions in the District of Columbia.
That continuing resolution also included a provision eliminating funds for both Title X, the federal government’s family planning program, and implementation of last year’s health-care reform law. Planned Parenthood is the leading recipient of Title X funds. Although Title X funds do not go directly for abortions, pro-life advocates contend federal money frees up other contributions to Planned Parenthood for the promotion and performance of abortions.
Though the short-term continuing resolutions have cut a total of about $10 billion, Land said that amounts to “an extreme, short-gap measure. We need a significant reduction of the budget, and we need it quickly. Our debt is rapidly spinning out of control, and we are borrowing more than 40 cents of every dollar we spend as a government, and that’s nothing less than generational theft.”
Congress failed to pass a budget last year, adopting instead a resolution that continued funding for the federal government through March 4.
Tom Strode is Washington bureau chief for Baptist Press. To see how your representative voted on the March 15 continuing resolution, visit http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll179.xml
The U.S. House of Representatives voted Feb. 18 to eliminate all federal funding for Planned Parenthood, the country’s No. 1 abortion provider, during the remainder of this fiscal year.
It is apparently the first time a chamber of Congress has ever voted to defund the organization, which recorded more than 324,000 abortions at its clinics in 2008, the most recent year for which statistics are available.
In a 240-185 roll call, the House acted to cut off all federal government money for the Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its 102 affiliates through Sept. 30. Planned Parenthood and its affiliates received $363.2 million in government grants and contracts during the 2008-09 fiscal year. Some of that total came from state and local governments.
Representatives added the Planned Parenthood amendment to a continuing resolution to extend funding for federal agencies in the absence of a 2011 budget. Congress failed to pass a budget last year, adopting instead a resolution that continued funding for the federal government through March 4.
Pro-life advocates applauded passage of the amendment.
Rep. Mike Pence, R.-Ind., the amendment’s sponsor, described the vote as “a victory for taxpayers and a victory for life. By banning federal funding to Planned Parenthood, Congress has taken a stand for millions of Americans who believe their tax dollars should not be used to subsidize the largest abortion provider in America.”
Douglas Johnson, the National Right to Life Committee’s legislative director, said the “landmark vote demonstrates that most House members now recognize Planned Parenthood is a hyper-political, under-regulated, out-of-control mega-marketer of abortion as a method of birth control.”
A long-time legislative strategist in Washington, Johnson said it is the first time he recalls a congressional vote to cut all federal funds for Planned Parenthood.
Pence’s amendment, as well as the continuing resolution it is a part of, faces an uphill battle in the Senate.
The House still had more than 100 amendments proposed to the continuing resolution the afternoon of Feb. 18 before a vote on final passage could be taken. Republicans are seeking to cut $100 billion from the budget in the resolution. In amendments approved Feb. 18, the House voted to withhold funds for implementation of last year’s health-care reform law.
The roll call on Pence’s amendment was largely along party lines. Ten Democrats reportedly joined 230 Republicans in supporting the proposal, although the official roll call had not been posted on the House’s website by 4:30 EST.
In a Feb. 17 floor speech on his amendment, Pence said he was not conducting a “war on Planned Parenthood…. Sadly, abortion on demand is legal in America. This debate is about who pays for it.
“Nobody is saying that Planned Parenthood can’t be the leading advocate of abortion on demand in America,” he said, “but why do I have to pay for it?
“Nobody is saying that Planned Parenthood can’t continue to be the largest abortion provider in America, but why do tens of millions of pro-life taxpayers have to pay for it?”
House approval of the amendment followed nearly three weeks of damaging publicity for Planned Parenthood. Hidden-camera videos secretly recorded at the organization’s clinics and released Feb. 1-8 showed employees demonstrating an apparent willingness to aid sex traffickers whose prostitutes are in their early teens.
Live Action, which is led by young pro-lifers, released video footage from secret investigations at six clinics that showed Planned Parenthood staff signaling cooperation with a self-described pimp in providing birth control, testing for sexually transmitted diseases and/or abortions for his alleged, under-age sex workers. The pimp and a prostitute who, in some cases, accompanied him to the clinics were actors doing undercover work for Live Action. An undercover audio from another Planned Parenthood clinic in Washington, D.C., and released Feb. 10 revealed a similar response from a staff member.
The clandestine videos were shot at Planned Parenthood clinics in New Jersey, New York and Virginia from Jan. 11 to 14, according to Live Action.
Pence has been working to cut federal funding for Planned Parenthood in recent years. Two previous attempts to eliminate grants for the organization under the Title X program failed. His proposals to that effect failed by a 231-189 vote in 2007 and by 247-183 in 2009.
Title X is the federal government’s family planning program, and Planned Parenthood is the leading recipient of Title X funds. Although Title X funds do not go directly for abortions, pro-life advocates contend federal money frees up other contributions to Planned Parenthood for the promotion and performance of abortions.
Southern Baptist ethicist Richard Land wrote the House leadership Feb. 16 to urge support for Pence’s amendment and other pro-life legislation in the continuing resolution. “We do not believe the government should be in the business of supporting the nation’s leading abortion provider with taxpayer dollars, no matter how Planned Parenthood allocates the money,” said Land, president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC).
The ERLC sent an e-mail alert to constituents earlier Feb. 18 to encourage calls to House members for support of the amendment.
Pence introduced in January the Title X Abortion Provider Prohibition Act, H.R. 217, which would prohibit Title X funds from going to all abortion providers, including Planned Parenthood.
The Government Accountability Office reported only $53 million of the $363 million in government funds Planned Parenthood received in 2008-09 came through Title X, Pence said.
Planned Parenthood recently issued new rules requiring at least one clinic per affiliate to perform abortions, signaling it is prepared to gain a greater market share of the abortion business.
The Republican leadership placed several pro-life measures in the continuing resolution. Among those are:
– Reinstatement of the Mexico City Policy, which would bar federal money for organizations that perform or promote abortions overseas.
– Restoration of the prohibition on funds for the United Nations Population Fund, which has been found to support China’s coercive population control program.
– Re-establishment of the ban on the use of federal and congressionally approved local funds for elective abortions in the District of Columbia.
Live Action’s newly released video stings are the latest in a series of undercover investigations of Planned Parenthood clinics released during the last four years.
A previous hidden-camera project by Live Action caught Planned Parenthood employees in Alabama, Arizona, California, Indiana and Tennessee seeking to cover up alleged child sexual abuse, prompting some state investigations. Another video sting showed a counselor at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Wisconsin providing erroneous information about fetal development.
In an undercover investigation Live Action conducted by telephone, Planned Parenthood workers in seven states were caught on audio tape agreeing to receive donations designated for abortions of African-American babies.
A day after voting against a Republican-led initiative to overturn President Obama’s health care reform law, Democratic U.S. Rep. Heath Shuler of North Carolina’s 11th Congressional District has co-sponsored a bill to prevent the reforms from funding abortions.
The measure would resurrect the language of the Stupak-Pitts amendment, a compromise proposed by a bipartisan coalition of lawmakers in 2009 that would have banned the health care reforms from funding elective abortions.
The abortion-ban amendment was included in the initial U.S. House version, but the Senate later stripped it from the legislation and passed a final compromise that didn’t include the abortion limits. Obama signed an executive order ostensibly barring the reforms from funding abortion, but pro-life groups say it didn’t go far enough.
Shuler is the only Democrat from the Tar Heel State’s congressional delegation to co-sponsor the new abortion-funding ban. Fellow Blue Dog Democrat Rep. Mike McIntyre of North Carolina’s 7th Congressional District voted Jan. 19 to scrap the entire health care law and start over from scratch.
Attempts to reach Shuler and McIntyre for comment were unsuccessful.
Freshman Rep. Renee Ellmers, R-2nd, said the bill is necessary because the health care reforms, as they currently stand, would end up funding abortions.
“Whether you are pro-life or pro-choice, it isn’t fair to those taxpayers who are pro-life that some of their taxes go towards abortions,” Ellmers said. “So it’s definitely something that needs to be addressed, that has to be addressed.”
Republicans also introduced a second bill that would codify and extend the Hyde Amendment. That amendment, first passed by Congress in 1976 and renewed each year, prohibits the federal government from funding abortion through government-run health care programs such as Medicare. The new bill would ban taxpayer-funded abortion across all federal government programs.
Six North Carolina representatives are co-sponsoring the legislation, including Shuler and McIntyre.
LuAnn Canipe, a spokeswoman for North Carolina Democratic Rep. Brad Miller’s office, said the 13th district congressman hadn’t seen the bills yet, but “strongly believes that it is the right of all women to have access to comprehensive reproductive and family planning education, including contraceptive and related reproductive health care services.”
Rep.Virginia Foxx, R-5th, said that barring taxpayer-funded abortion is part of protecting unborn children.
“I’m proud to co-sponsor legislation like this is that codifies the Hyde Amendment and removes any uncertainty — taxpayers should not foot the bill for the terrible practice of abortion,” she said.
The House of Representatives today fulfilled its election mandate to repeal the bill that caused Republicans to sweep into office and install a new pro-life majority.
On a 245-189 vote, the House approved a measure to repeal the Obamacare bill that had the federal government essentially taking over the health care industry and putting a program in place that prompted significant concerns about abortion funding and rationing among pro-life groups analyzing the legislation.
Three Democrats joined every Republican in voting for the repeal bill while no Republicans joined Democrats in voting against it, including Reps. Mike McIntyre of North Carolina, Dan Boren of Oklahoma, and Mike Ross of Arkansas. Larry Kissel of North Carolina initially voted for repeal but changed his vote to oppose the bill at the last minute.
Before the vote, the House defeated a Democratic-led attempt to send the bill back to committee, 245-181.
Speaker John Boehner laid out the case for repeal.
“Over the last two years the American people have been discussing the issue of health care. And the number one concern for the American people is the cost of health care – and yet what we see with ObamaCare is an increase in costs to the American people,” he said. “The Congress can do better in terms of replacing ObamaCare with commonsense reforms that will bring down the cost of health insurance and expand access for more Americans.”
“And repeal means keeping a promise,” he added. “This is what we said we would do. We listened to the people – we made a commitment to them – a pledge to make their priorities our priorities.”
Congressman Mike Pence, a potential presidential candidate from Iowa, added, “I urge all of my colleagues in both political parties to join us today as we keep our promise to the American people, as we scrap this health care reform bill of last year and start over.”
Rep. John Fleming, a Louisiana Republican who is also a physician, noted Obamacare’s lack of abortion funding limits.
“One way or another, taxpayer money will help and assist abortions that will occur as a result of Obamacare,” he said. “There’s nothing that blocks using some, if not all, of that money for abortions.”
Before the vote, pro-life advocacy groups reiterated their support for repeal.
“We fully support the effort to repeal this disastrous law,” Catholic Vote told its members. “This wildly unpopular health care law is exactly what is wrong in Washington. The massive new law is filled with new spending, mandates, and taxes, including loopholes that would allow taxpayer funding for abortion, and threats to conscience and the future of faith-based private health care. It must be repealed, de-funded, or stripped of every threat to liberty, conscience, and life.”
Americans United for Life Action president Charmaine Yoest added, “With the Obama Administration arguing in court that they have the right to force this upon Americans because they may tax us, AULA calls on Congress to say no to this abortion tax and the law that violates the principles of the pro-life Hyde Amendment. The vast majority of Americans agree that no tax for abortions is acceptable.”
“It is time to repeal President Obama’s health care law. It allows taxpayer funding to go to insurance plans that cover abortions, directly contrary to the long-standing Hyde Amendment,” she explained. ” It also permits, contrary to Hyde, direct funding of abortion in some areas. This was demonstrated in the furor over federal funding of abortion through ‘high-risk pools,” which is now prohibited.”
“It contains vague ‘mandates’ for private insurance plans into which abortion coverage can be pushed,” she added. “And the President’s executive order does not remedy the anti-life aspects of the law. Given the pro-abortion sentiments of Obama’s administration, it is unlikely that they will attempt to keep abortion out of health care through its regulations. But they are out of step with the vast majority of Americans – pro-life and pro-choice – who agree that we should not pay for abortions with tax dollars.”
With repeal passing the House, the focus moves to the Senate, where pro-abortion Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid has already said he will not allow the repeal measure to enjoy a debate or vote. Senate Republicans may be forced to employ filibusters or attempt to attach the repeal bill to another piece of legislation as an amendment in order to get a vote on it.
The debate saw some lawmakers step on the new tone political pundits say is needed in Washington following the Arizona shootings involving Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords.
Rep. Steve Cohen, a Tennessee Democrat, tried to hit Republicans with what he called “lies” about Obamacare being a “government takeover” of the health care system.
“They say it’s a government takeover of health care, a big lie, just like Goebbels. You say it enough, you repeat the lie, you repeat the lie, you repeat the lie and eventually people believe it,” he said.
In an interview with CNN, he stood by his comments, saying, “I didn’t see anything wrong with it. Goebbels was the great propagandist of probably the 20th century, and his whole theory was if you tell the lie over and over again people will believe it.”
The House of Representatives took its first step two weeks ago in repealing the abortion-funding ObamaCare bill that pro-life groups strongly oppose.
On a 236-181 vote, Republicans approved the rules for debate for the legislation they will vote on next week to repeal the government takeover of health care. Four Democrats (Reps. Dan Boren of Oklahoma, Mike McIntyre and Larry Kissell of North Carolina and Mike Ross of Arkansas) joined Republicans in supporting the rule while two Republicans voted present and 15 lawmakers of both parties did not vote.
The vote also paves the way for axing the abortion funding from ObamaCare.
The rule also provides for consideration of H. Res. 9, which instructs relevant House Committees to replace Obamacare with legislation that achieves certain goals including to “prohibit taxpayer funding for abortions and provide conscience protections for health care providers.”
When Congress passed the government-run health care bill, it did so without any limits on abortion funding and language mandating taxpayer financing of abortion in certain circumstances.
Obama eventually issued a controversial executive order supposedly taking the abortion funding issue off the table.
However, virtually every pro-life group said it would not mitigate the abortion funding because it doesn’t have the effect of law, could be reversed in the future, and because it didn’t tackle much of the abortion funding in the bill. The Obama administration could also ignore the order and not put it in place when the health care law goes into effect.
Under the new health care law, states will be in charge of their own health care exchanges that are available for individuals and small businesses.
The exchange doesn’t go into effect until 2014 and states are filing lawsuits seeking to stop the pro-abortion health care bill in its other pro-abortion provisions entirety, but states are moving now to exercise their right to opt out of some of the abortion funding.
Arizona, Tennessee, Mississippi and Louisiana have passed similar bills that have already been signed into law by governors in those states and several other states are expected to consider legislation in their upcoming legislative sessions. Governors in Oklahoma and Florida vetoed similar legislation.
Pro-life group Susan B. Anthony List praised the Wednesday passage of the Defense Authorization bill without the amendment approving abortions on military bases.
SBA List President Marjorie Dannenfelser declared the passage of the Department of Defense bill without the pro-abortion Burris Amendment as a victory for pro-lifers adamantly against taxpayer-funded abortions.
“Congress heard the pro-life grassroots activists’ voices and kept abortion out of military medical facilities. It is time for the abortion industry to stop using the military as a place to advance its agenda,” Dannenfelser proclaimed in a statement.
In May, Sen. Roland Burris added an amendment to the Defense Authorization Act in the Senate Armed Services Committee, that would allow elective abortions on domestic and international military bases. According to SBA List, the amendment would have gone further than Clinton’s 1993 executive order which only allowed abortions on international military bases.
Current law prohibits the performance of abortions by Department of Defense medical personnel or in Department of Defense medical facilities except when the life of the mother is at risk or when pregnancy results from rape or incest.
SBA List rallied pro-life constituents to send nearly 35,000 e-mails and make over 4,000 calls urging the Senate to oppose any version of the bill containing the pro-abortion Burris Amendment.
On Dec. 9, Republicans blocked Democrats from getting the 60 votes necessary to bring the loaded bill to the Senate floor for discussion and an approval vote.
Last week, Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) raised another version of the National Defense Authorization Act which did not contain the Burris Amendment. It also did not include the controversial amendment that would have allowed open homosexuality in military.
A separate amendment repealing the military ban on gays and lesbians serving openly was approved by Congress last weekend and signed by President Barack Obama Tuesday.
Planned Parenthood Federation of America expressed outrage at Skelton’s removal of the Burris amendment.
“It is outrageous that women who are serving honorably in the U.S. military are denied the same access to reproductive health care as women back home,” PPFA President Cecile Richards said in a Dec. 17 statement.
She said supporters of the legislation were establishing a “double standard” for military women.
Despite PPFA’s outrage, Democrats agreed to support the stripped down act. The bill passed the U.S. House and Senate on voice votes. Skelton, also chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, praised the compromise.
“For 48 consecutive years, Congress has carried out its duty to the men and women of the military by passing a defense authorization act,” Skelton told reporters. “I am very proud that Congress continued the tradition by approving this defense authorization bill, which will help protect America and take care of our men and women in uniform and their families.”
The DOD defense authorization bill will authorize $548.2 billion for the Pentagon’s base budget and $158.7 billion for overseas operations in Iraq and Afghanistan in the 2011 fiscal year. It will also give a 1.4 percent pay raise for troops, reauthorize military special pays and bonuses, and a guarantee that children of service members can stay covered under the military’s TRICARE health care program until they are 26 years of age.
This is also good news for the Military Chaplains Association which advocated for soldiers’ pay raises and bonuses along with the Military Officers of America Association.
The bill now awaits the president’s signature.
After hearing oral arguments yesterday from challengers and defenders of the nation’s healthcare reform law, US District Judge Henry Hudson, in Richmond, Virginia, said he may rule on the law’s constitutionality before the end of the year.
It was Hudson’s turn to take the spotlight in a legal war against the new law that has erupted in more than a dozen federal courts across the country. Last week, a federal judge in Pensacola, Florida, refused to dismiss key portions of a lawsuit filed by officials from 20 states who seek to overturn the law. Those plaintiffs fared better than a Christian legal defense organization called the Thomas More Law Center that saw its suit against the law dismissed entirely by a federal judge in Detroit, Michigan, earlier this month (the center plans to appeal).
The lawsuit in the Virginia federal court was filed by Virginia Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli II. Similar to all but one of the state officials named in the Florida federal case, Cuccinelli is a Republican.
Also similar to the plaintiffs in all the suits, Cuccinelli takes aim at the new law’s requirement that individuals obtain health insurance coverage or pay a penalty. The federal government claims that it has a right to mandate this under the constitution’s commerce clause, which authorizes it to regulate interstate commerce. Cuccinelli maintains that the mandate oversteps the bounds of the clause because it penalizes Americans for commercial inactivity — in other words, not buying something. In the process, the law improperly overrides a new Virginia law promising residents that they are not obliged to purchase health insurance.
“If we lose this fight and the federal government is allowed to cross this line, Congress will be granted a virtually unlimited power to order you to buy anything,” Cuccinelli stated in a press release.
Lawyers for the Obama administration have countered in the various federal court cases that individuals who forgo insurance are not passive actors in the healthcare marketplace, because they stand to gain free care from hospitals and physicians when they need it. The cost of free care, the argument goes, is passed on to providers, insurers, and government. Ultimately, cost-shifting translates into higher provider fees, health insurance premiums, and taxes for individuals, contributing to the dysfunction of the healthcare system, according to the Obama administration.
In August, Hudson rejected the federal government’s motion to dismiss Cuccinelli’s suit. In today’s hearing, he heard oral arguments from each side for a summary judgment, in which a court decides a case without a trial because the facts are not in dispute and one side is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. Cuccinelli has asked Hudson to issue an injunction against the entire healthcare law if he finds the individual mandate unconstitutional.
US District Judge Roger Vinson in Pensacola, Florida, is scheduled to hear oral arguments on motions for summary judgments in the healthcare reform litigation before him on December 16. This timetable means that his ruling on the law’s constitutionality also could come before year’s end, if not in early 2011.
The other federal lawsuits are not as far down the legal road as those in Michigan, Florida, and Virginia. Following the lead of the Thomas More Law Center, the assorted plaintiffs, as well as the Obama administration, are prepared to appeal any loss at either the district or appellate level. Legal experts say that conflicting appellate court decisions — the Obama administration wins in one court and loses in another — would make it more likely for the US Supreme Court to agree to hear some version of the case.
New Docs: Kagan on Assisted Suicide Law http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/06/04/new-docs-kagan-on-assisted-suicide-law/
Tennessee became the second state today to stop at least some of the abortion funding in the national health care bill President Barack Obama signed. Arizona was the first state to have its bill signed into law and now, Governor Phil Bredesen let the Tennessee bill become law without his signature.
Without comment, Bredesen refused to sign legislation barring abortion as a funded benefit in new federally mandated health care exchanges. Since he did not issue a veto, the protective policy takes effect immediately.
Tennessee law allows the governor to sign a bill, veto it, or allow it to become law without his signature.
Sponsored by pro-life Rep. Matthew Hill and pro-life Sen. Diane Black, the new law says: “No health care plan required to be established in this state through an exchange pursuant to federal health care reform legislation enacted by the 111th Congress shall offer coverage for abortion services.”
HB 2681 / SB 2686 passed the state House 70-23 and the state Senate 27-3.
Tennessee’s General Assembly was the nation’s first to pass legislation making clear that abortion would not be included as a benefit in federally required health care exchanges. Arizona, Mississippi and Florida have since followed suit and bills at governors’ desks in the latter two states while several other states are working on legislation.
Tennessee Right to Life has praised legislators for their work this session to protect human life, particularly leadership of both the state House and state Senate.
“Pro-life citizens around the state are grateful to our new House Speaker, Kent Williams, for making the protection of life a priority, just as he said he would,” president of the pro-life group, told LifeNews.com today. “And without the principled counsel and leadership of Lt. Governor Ron Ramsey, this session’s victories for life would never have been realized.”
Under the new health care law, states will be in charge of their own health care exchanges that are available for individuals and small businesses. HB 2681 will keep any insurance plans on the Tennessee exchange from offering abortion coverage.
The exchange doesn’t go into effect until 2014 and states are filing lawsuits seeking to stop the pro-abortion health care bill in its other pro-abortion provisions entirety, but states are moving now to exercise their right to opt out of some of the abortion funding.
Passage of the ‘abortion opt out’ bill follows easy passage this session of bills removing priority status from the Tennessee Planned Parenthood abortion business — redirecting family planning funds to local health departments which do not perform abortions.
Other bills required posting of the state’s non-coercion policy in private offices and facilities which perform abortions, and the legislature saw the first passage of SJR 127, a resolution requiring a public vote in 2014 to make the Tennessee Constitution neutral once again on the matter of abortion.
Tennessee Governor Phil Bredesen surprised pro-life advocates today and, despite his pro-abortion stance, signed a bill that helps stop forced abortions. The Freedom from Coercion Act will require abortion facilities to prominently post non-coercion policies and impose penalties against facilities which do not comply.
The state House and Senate worked out the differences in two different versions of the bill, which requires the posting of signs.
The signs appearing at abortion centers would read: “It is against the law for anyone, regardless of the person’s relationship to you, to coerce you into having or to force you to have an abortion.”
Rep. Susan Lynn and Sen. Jack Johnson sponsored the companion measures which passed overwhelmingly by both the state House (87-8) and state Senate (29-2.)
The Act requires abortion providers throughout the state to post Tennessee’s non-coercion policy and provides for fines against those medical facilities which do not comply. Among those required to post the signs are abortion facilities, hospitals, and offices of private physicians who perform abortions.
Tennessee Right to Life applauded legislators for moving the bill forward and said their work “has resulted in enormous gains for Tennessee’s pro-life movement this legislative session.”
“Despite the challenges of Planned Parenthood v. Sundquist, Tennessee’s pro-life leadership is working creatively to represent the state’s pro-life majority and to restore as much protection as the state Supreme Court’s terrible 2000 decision currently allows,” Brian Harris, the organization’s president, told LifeNews.com today.
“This session’s victories demonstrate the importance of pro-life leadership and the necessity for pro-life voters to make sacrificial efforts this fall to continue electing candidates with a demonstrated commitment to the protection of human life,” Harris said.
With studies showing as many as 60 percent of women who have had abortions saying they felt pressure from a husband or boyfriend, friends or family, or an employer to have an abortion, the signs could reaffirm a woman’s decision to not have one despite the pressure.
Abortion centers that don’t comply with the law would face a $2,500 fine for not posting the required signs.
“Tennessee is making strides toward protecting women and girls who are pressured into abortions they do not want,” said Karen Brukardt, legislative lobbyist for Tennessee Right to Life.
She told LifeNews.com, “With this vote Tennessee’s legislators have shown their sensitivity and support for some of our state’s most vulnerable individuals, especially women at risk of abuse and violence if they don’t submit to unwanted abortions.”
Linda Norfleet of Hermitage was one of more than 100 pro-life people in the legislature for the vote and she told the Tennessean newspaper this bill is good for women.
“The measure … represents a huge step forward on behalf of the safety of young women and their personal decisions, as well as safety for the life of their unborn child,” she said.
Attorneys with Americans United for Life are urging the Obama administration not to expand embryonic stem cell research beyond the ways in which it has already promoted the life-taking and ineffective research.
Last month, the National Institutes of Health announced it was proposing a “technical change” in their guidelines for destruction of human embryos.
The change would allow use of younger human embryos in experiments.
Although the NIH ignored the majority of comments from the public opposing its implementation of the executive order President Barack Obama issued forcing taxpayers to fund the destruction of human life to obtain embryonic stem cells, AUL hopes NIH will listen this time around.
In its comment, AUL demonstrates that embryonic stem cell research violates applicable law and is unnecessary in light of advances in adult stem cell research.
“The NIH has proposed an improper new definition of ‘human embryonic stem cell’ that will allow even more funding for the destruction of human embryos,” said William L. Saunders, a senior AUL attorney.
“But this change would violate current law that forbids public funding for any research that places an embryo at risk of injury. It is also not necessary, given the incredible advances we have already seen in treatments using ethical forms of stem cell research, such as adult stem cell research,” Saunders adds. Full story at LifeNews.com
Comments (2)
tv online…
http://www.tv-online-live.com...
360 games…
I’m thinking u. I want to be with u. We are yearning for u. I own a crush on u. I have to hug and kiss u. I love u. Ikaw, love mo rin ba ang letter u?…