|
|
|
|
Why the "No
Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act," and the "Protect
Life Act" are so Critically Important Part Two of Four By Dave Andrusko "But those
involved on both sides of the abortion issue say things
are different in the 112th Congress for two key reasons:
the high priority that Republicans have given the issue
as well as the influx of anti-abortion members of
Congress into both the House and Senate." Two days before a massive crowd will come to the nation's capital to commemorate the 38th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, pro-life House Republicans introduced two important bills intended to repair and strengthen barriers to federal subsidies for abortion. (See Parts Three and Four.) The "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act" (H.R. 3) would replace the patchwork of abortion-related limitations that have been applied to various federal programs over the past 35 years and more (such as the Hyde Amendment) with a permanent, government-wide prohibition on federal subsidies for abortion and for health plans that cover abortion (with narrow exceptions). The "Protect Life Act" (H.R. 358) rewrites multiple provisions of the 2010 health care law--ObamaCare--in order to prohibit federal subsidies for abortion, and federal regulations that could expand abortion in various ways. In response some accounts recycled the same tired old lines--why an emphasis on the "social issues" during an economic downturn, or that the measures were just sops to the "base." But other stories, perhaps because the authors were aware of the solidly pro-life credentials of the House Republican leadership and the sponsors of these bills, understood that this was much ado about much. For example, yesterday pro-life House Speaker John Boehner used his weekly press conference to emphasize how important the proposals are. "A ban on taxpayer funding of abortions is the will of the people and it ought to be the will of the land," Boehner said. Pressed by a reporter to explain why House Republicans were making abortion a top issue, Boehner responded, "Our members feel strongly about the sanctity of human life. We listened to the American people, we made a commitment to the American people in our Pledge to America, and we're continuing to fulfill our commitment." Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) is the prime sponsor of the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act. "The fact that it is designated as HR 3 speaks volumes about priorities," he said. "This leadership under speaker Boehner, right on down the line of the Republican leadership, believes in this. This is not about political expediency." The potential impact of these two laws is directly proportional to the heated--and off the mark-- pro-abortion response. In general, they insist that the former is too "extreme" (nothing new there), and the latter is not needed (harkening back to a bogus Executive Order signed by pro-abortion President Barack Obama that unsuccessfully attempted to give cover to a number of Democrats who'd previously voted pro-life). But the leadership of major pro-abortion organizations understands there is a new sheriff in town, at least in the House. "This is a very serious threat," Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards told POLITICO. "These folks have just taken office and this is what they're focusing on…Based on what we're seeing, just few days after the start of Congress, we're absolutely ready for a very serious fight." Please send your feedback on Today's News & Views and National Right to Life News Today at daveandrusko@gmail.com. If you like, join those who are following me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/daveha. |