Congressmen (R & D!) propose total ban on taxpayer-funded abortion

From CNA:

Congressmen to propose government-wide ban on taxpayer-funded abortion

Washington D.C., Jul 30, 2010 / 06:03 am (CNA).- On Thursday Reps. Chris Smith (R-N.J.) and Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.) [A Democrat!] were scheduled to introduce legislation which would establish a permanent government-wide prohibition on taxpayer funding for abortion. Pro-life leaders praised the comprehensiveness of the proposal.

The legislation, titled the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,” also codifies conscience protections for health care providers who do not want to participate in an abortion.

At present, many funding restrictions such as the Hyde Amendment to the Health and Human Services Appropriations Bill must be re-approved by Congress each year. It is also uncertain whether President Barack Obama’s executive order which restricts abortion funds in the 2010 health care legislation will be effective. [I am not so sure that that is "uncertain".]

In a March interview with Catholic News Agency, Rep. Lipinski had urged action to pass statutory laws to restrict abortion funding in the new health care law.

Dr. Charmaine Yoest, president and CEO of Americans United for Life Action, said that the Smith-Lipinski bill will “comprehensively end” taxpayer-funded abortion.

“Congress can act now and fix this problem once and for all, and we are urging our grassroots activists across the nation to contact their representatives and support this sensible legislation,” she commented.

The Family Research Council (FRC) said the bill was particularly important in light of the federal health care law which it believes will fund and subsidize abortion, and also in light of efforts to open military bases to abortion.

FRC Action senior vice president Tom McClusky charged that President Obama and congressional leaders have repeatedly attempted to “eviscerate” agreed limits on federal funding of abortion.

“We applaud Congressman Smith and numerous Members on both sides of the aisle for responding to the concerns of the American people by introducing a measure that applies an abortion funding ban across the federal government,” McClusky commented. “The American people, regardless of their views of abortion’s legality, should not be forced to pay for someone’s abortion.”

“We applaud all the Democrats and Republicans cosponsoring the Smith abortion funding ban, and urge all Americans to support this commonsense effort to restore government funding neutrality on abortion,” he continued.

A recent memo from the Library of Congress’ Congressional Research Service found that the health care legislation passed earlier this year did not specifically exclude abortion funding from high-risk insurance pools established by the law.

On Thursday the Department of Health and Human Services issued a new regulation which clearly prohibits the state high-risk pools from covering elective abortions.

 

Now we need to watch who lines up to attack this legislation.

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Emanations from Penumbras. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Congressmen (R & D!) propose total ban on taxpayer-funded abortion

  1. Legisperitus says:

    Bet more than half of them will be Catholic.

  2. Cristero says:

    I will pray at the Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament today in Sacramento for this and other intentions. Te ruego, Señor!

  3. ghlad says:

    I’m praying that, well, first of all, something like this one day is actually passed. Maybe this legislation should wait until after November. Might have a better shot then.

    But the saddest part of all the bemoaning of “federal funding for abortion” is that it seems like every person is forgetting the Mexico City Policy and how Obama (like all Democrats in office since it was enacted) rescinded it. Thanks to Obama, we’re spending our federal funds to assist and deliver abortions all over the world.

    So it sometimes seems odd that we get so bent out of shape about our tax dollars paying to murder the innocents when… it’s happening already.

  4. Dennis Martin says:

    “On Thursday the Department of Health and Human Services issued a new regulation which clearly prohibits the state high-risk pools from covering elective abortions.”

    It would be important to see the regulation. “Elective” can be a code word, since the abortionists claim that for the sake of a woman’s mental health, almost any abortion can be justified as “necessary” and not “elective.” Unless this regulation defines elective and necessary (to save the mother’s life, for instance), it means nothing.

    Catholic New Service ought to do its readers the service of having checked this out and clarified it instead of leaving it at “elective abortions.”

  5. Hans says:

    the Smith-Lipinski bill

    The usual practice is to name the member from the majority party first (it helps it get passed, often), so it should probably be called the Lipinski-Smith bill.

    Anyway, Rep. Lipinski’s father held the same seat, and similar convictions on abortion, before him. The younger Lipinski has been a frequent target by anti-civil-rights (euphemistically a.k.a. “Pro Choice”) forces within his own party for some time.

  6. John V says:

    The “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act”. What a novel concept: giving a bill a simple, straightforward title that describes exactly what the legislation is intended to do. God bless them and their work.

  7. wolfeken says:

    So far this has 155 co-sponsors — 138 Republicans and 17 Democrats. 228 votes are needed to pass the bill. Prayer and elbow grease.

  8. Supertradmum says:

    maybe we have to stop paying taxes earmarked to murder babies…

  9. Papabile says:

    Hans:

    Usually the majority member IS named first. But, usually the majority member is the one who introduced it. Lipinski did not introduce it, Smith did. He becomes the primary name up front.

    Lipinski was the singular Democrat who voted FOR the Stupak language on the Motion to Recommit for Health Care. Every other Democrat opposed that language. This bill would go farther than that.

    Lipinski brought 15 other Democrats with him to cosponsor this. (All of those Democrats voted against the Stupak language.) The other 132 cosponsors were Republican.

  10. MisterH says:

    I live in Congressman Lipinski’s district, and he has been very strong in the defense of life, even to the point of attending various pro-life related fundraisers.

    The below link is a Chicago Tribune interview with the Congressman in which he discusses his vote against the health care bill.

    http://allhands-ondeck.blogspot.com/2010/03/congressman-dan-lipinski-put-principle.html

  11. wanda says:

    ..when out on the lawn (White House) there arose such a clatter,
    the President sprang from his bed to see what was the matter.
    When what to his wondering eyes should appear?
    A Pro-Life Democrat!

  12. Papabile says:

    MisterH:

    I’m not sure if you misconstued my statement before. I was PRAISING Lipinski. He was the only Democrat to take the real Pro-Life vote.

  13. wanda says:

    For those who would like to support this legislation by contacting your representative, the Susan B. Anthony List (web-site) has an easy link to send an email to your Comgressman or Senator. On the web page at the top right, choose ‘Take Action’ and on the next page scroll down a little and choose ‘Support the No Taxpayer Funding of Abortion Act.’ They make it easy for you. Urge your representative to support this legislation.