Posts Tagged ‘anti-abortion legislation’

Group pushes more anti-abortion laws with sights on ‘Roe’

Posted on: February 29th, 2012 by Sofia Resnick 3 Comments

Screenshot of NARAL Pro-Choice America President Nancy Keenan (left) debating Americans United for Life President Charmaine Yoest on PBS NewsHour Feb. 23, 2012.

The national anti-abortion-rights group behind Virginia’s controversial ultrasound bill last week released seven new bills it plans to push through state legislatures this year. (more…)

(VIDEO) Chris Smith: ‘Obama is the enemy of life’

Posted on: January 24th, 2012 by Sofia Resnick No Comments

The 24th GOP presidential debate in Tampa, Fla., Monday night drove home what has become more clear in the past few weeks: The Republican Party, at this stage in time, is not united — at least when it comes to who they think should lead the country instead of Barack Obama. (more…)

FRC conference sets stage for more aggressive anti-abortion rhetoric, legislation in 2012

Posted on: January 23rd, 2012 by Sofia Resnick 4 Comments

Updated Feb. 1 with a clarification*

As anti-abortion activists protested (and abortion-rights activists counter-protested) the 39th anniversary of Roe v. Wade on Capitol Hill Monday, lawmakers and policy leaders gathered at the Family Research Council headquarters in Washington, D.C., to discuss effective anti-abortion strategy in 2012. Many of the speakers used super-charged language when discussing abortion and contraception, and goals centered on the GOP taking control over the Senate and White House in November to advance federal anti-abortion legislation.


Abortion foes use live ultrasounds to highlight anti-abortion-rights legislation

Posted on: October 13th, 2011 by Sofia Resnick 1 Comment

While House leaders, Democrats, and Republicans in Congress engaged in a contentious debate over an anti-abortion-rights bill Thursday, anti-abortion-rights activists were at the Capitol using pregnant women and ultrasound technology to make the case that abortion should be illegal. (more…)

South Dakota anti-abortion-rights legal fund supported by mostly out-of-state donors

Posted on: September 26th, 2011 by Sofia Resnick No Comments

A fund created by the South Dakota Legislature in 2005 to defend a controversial anti-abortion-rights bill introduced that year is largely bankrolled by out-of-state donors, some of whom proclaim to be employees of Jesus, reports the Argus Leader. (more…)

U.S. House passes ban on tax subsidies for health insurance plans that include abortion coverage

Posted on: May 4th, 2011 by Sofia Resnick 3 Comments

The U.S. House Representatives on Wednesday approved a measure that repeals part of the year-old Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and would, among several provisions, ban tax subsidies for private health insurance plans that include abortion as a covered service; prevent citizens from deducting abortion as a medical expense unless it was the result of rape, incest, or to save the life of the mother — and invites the potential for the Internal Revenue Service to investigate how women who had abortions became pregnant and how they paid for their abortions.

New Jersey Republican Rep. Chris Smith’s No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion, or House Resolution 3, as expected, passed 251-175. What will happen when it moves to the Senate remains unclear. President Obama has issued a veto threat on the bill, but the GOP could always attach the amendment to another bill.

HR 3 would go beyond the provisions of the annually renewed Hyde Amendment (PDF), which since 1976 has prohibited federal money from funding abortion. This new law would effectively raise taxes on individuals and small businesses that choose to cover abortions in their plans and widens conscience protections for medical professionals who choose not to perform abortions — even in cases of medical emergency.

Congress debated the bill for more than three hours, with opponents and proponents arguing in a circle: Republicans said American taxpayers should not have to pay for abortions; Democrats argued that American taxpayers already do not pay for abortions under federal law. What the bill really does, opponents said, is make it incredibly difficult for abortion seekers to pay for the procedure.

Rep. Carolyn Maloney  (D-N.Y.) said the bill is “outrageous in its arrogance.” “The right to choose is meaningless without access to abortion,” she said. “[This bill] is anti-women, anti-choice, anti-respect and anti-business.”

A few Republicans, such as Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kan.) said the true point of the law was to make abortion rare.

Democrats slammed the GOP for pushing legislation that they said meddles with Americans’ health care decisions and that raises taxes on small businesses — instead of working on legislation that creates jobs or reduces the federal deficit.

“This is an attempt to legislate something that it isn’t,” said Rep. Sam Farr (D-Calif.) “This is a crock of bologna. [Prohibiting taxpayer funding of abortion] has been the law of the land for 35 years.”

Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.) called HR 3 an “extremist offensive bill” and reminded colleagues that Smith’s initial proposed amendment attempted to redefine rape, giving exceptions to this law only to women who were “forcibly raped.”

“Taxpayers oppose government funding for abortion,” Smith, the bill’s author, said. “[HR 3 will not] subsidize the killing of babies except in the rare cases for rape, incest or [to save the life of the mother]. Today, we end taxpayer complicity in abortion violence.”

Rep. Rob Andrews (D-N.J.) said Smith’s bill violates the Constitution by attempting to use the tax code to restrict a legal procedure on the basis of ideology.

“It is wrong to raise taxes on people who exercise constitutional rights,” Andrews said. “Whether you are pro-life or pro-choice, if you are pro-Constitution, you should vote no.”

Right before the final vote, Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.) proposed a motion that would protect victims of rape and incest from having to reveal their medical records to federal agencies in the event of an IRS audit, for example. Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) called Speier’s motion a “red herring,” and “an amendment looking for a problem that isn’t there” (which is how many opponents characterized HR 3). The motion was voted down 235-192.

Before voting on HR 3, the House voted to repeal mandatory funding to school-based health centers. Four Republicans voted against the repeal and three Democrats voted for the repeal.

New model legislation would call for states to investigate all abortion clinics

Posted on: March 31st, 2011 by Sofia Resnick No Comments

Image by Matt MahurinThe anti-abortion rights lobbying and policy organization Americans United for Life has already updated its recently released model legislation guide for 2011.

Among the brand new proposals is (more…)

Americans United for Life releases 2011 guide for anti-abortion rights model legislation

Posted on: March 16th, 2011 by Sofia Resnick 2 Comments

Image by: Matt MahurinNational anti-abortion rights law and policy group American United for Life, which credits itself with informing anti-abortion and other health-care related legislation, this month released its Defending Life 2011, a comprehensive guide of model legislation specifically for abortion, (more…)