Worldwide population control and abortion funding in global warming bill co-sponsored by Gingrich
Newt Gingrich recently called the global warming ad he made with Nancy Pelosi in 2008 “the dumbest single thing I’ve done in years.”
But that ad didn’t come out of nowhere. Nineteen years earlier Gingrich and Pelosi were co-sponsors of the Global Warming Prevention Act of 1989, which contained devastating anti-life language and funding.
I came by this information in an interesting way. A veteran Capitol Hill staffer forwarded me the information after an associate stumbled onto the legislation while chronicling Gingrich’s global warming sins. I see liberal Talking Points Memo noticed this four days ago but went into no detail.
The Global Warming Prevention Act was introduced on February 22, 1989. Pelosi signed on immediately, but Gingrich didn’t add his name until June 15. So he and his staff had plenty of time to read it. At the time Gingrich was House Minority Whip.
Aside from Pelosi, other radical abortion proponents co-sponsoring the Act included Barbara Boxer, John Conyers, Barney Frank, Chuck Schumer, Chris Shays, Louise Slaughter, and Olympia Snowe.
Only one other notable Republican pro-lifer, Duncan Hunter, was on the list. (Bob Smith withdrew his support.)
The relevant portion of the Act is Title XI. World Population Growth, Sections 1101-1103. As TPM synopsized, this bill “would have made controlling the growth of the world population a goal of the U.S. government and given the UN a chance to do something about it.”
Mexico City policy overturned
The Global Warming Act gutted the Mexico City policy, which President Reagan had enacted in 1984 to block U.S. funding from going to international groups that refer for or commit abortions (and still in force at this time with GHW Bush at the helm). This, of course, included Planned Parenthood International. Section 1102(c)(2) of the Act states:
No restrictions may be placed on the use of these funds which would be inconsistent with the United States constitutional rights of privacy, regardless of whether such funds are used to provide such services abroad, to support international efforts, or any other use.
Billions given to Planned Parenthood and UNFPA
With the Mexico City policy out of the way, the Act appropriated $2.7 billion over five years to family planning groups like Planned Parenthood, of which $300 million went to the United Nations Population Fund, an organization the Bush administration defunded in 2005 after concluding UNFPA helps China with coercive abortions and sterilizations.
International abortions funded
It also appears the Global Warming Act overturned the Helms amendment, which bans U.S. foreign assistance funds from being used to pay for abortions. Section 1102(a) and (c)(1) state:
POLICY- It is the policy of the United States that family planning services should be made available to all persons requesting them….
LIMITATIONS- None of the funds authorized by this section may be used to pay for the performance of involuntary sterilization or abortion or to coerce any person to accept family planning.
Any court in the land would say this means funds could be used for voluntary sterilization or abortion, with no age restrictions in the bill.
Pro-lifers beware. Gingrich is well known for “erratic” political behavior.
Gingrich says now life begins at conception but said last week it begins at implantation, and he has also supported taxpayer funded embryonic stem cell research.
Gingrich says now he would defund Planned Parenthood but co-sponsored legislation that would have potentially given billions to the abortion giant.
Gingrich says now he supports the Mexico City policy but co-sponsored legislation that would have gutted it.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I like Newt. He’s my vote in the primary over Romney, mainly because I have a lot of family in MA and they have told me horror stories of Romneycare, and how much costs have gone up under it.
I am hopeful that Newt’s conversion to Catholisim will help him to protect life at all stages, but I understand the reluctance of those withholding their support, and I would be lying if I said I didn’t have reservations. However, I have many reservations about Romney as well so at this point I am just trying to trust my gut feeling. I worry that Romney won’t support full repeal of Obamacare and will try to “fix” it which could lead to things being left in that would allow (or allow people to sue) for abortion, euthanasia services.
The bigger question is: Why are we allowing the media to tell us who to vote for?
Why must it be Romney or Newt? C’mon, people! Both Bachmann and Santorum have solid Christian principles that make them stand out. If you’re looking for a revolution instead of little changes, Ron Paul is your candidate (and he suggested Personhood for the preborn long before the Personhood Movement began). I’d take any of those 3 over Romney or Newt.
WOW. Thank you, Jill. This is horrifying. I can’t believe Gingrich tried to overturn Mexico City.
The thing people need to realize is that BOTH parties are owned by the financial oligarchy (Rockefeller et al). The CFR (of which Gingrich is a member) lays down foreign policy. Population control of 3rd world countries has been official policy of the US since 1974. See:
Kissinger Report aka NSSM 200
http://www.lifeissues.net/writers/clo/clo_01kissingerreport.html
http://www.hli.org/index.php/kissinger-report/193?task=view
I’m officially backing Ron Paul now.
I knew it, he is a phony RINO. We need to vote according to a candidates actions & not what they say. The National Right To Life questionaires are killing us because all the candidates lie & answer the Q’s of what we want to hear then switch when they get into office. NRTL swears by this faulty system. Don’t believe me? Go to their website & see their endorsement of Mitt Romney of all people. Can you believe that? Even with the 14 page Romney Deception Report which has been out for years on the internet, they still believe in Romney’s empty words. The irony of it all is Newt talks a good game. He even sounds like the most conservative candidate, when he clearly is not. Let’s pray that Santorum becomes the party’s new “Flavor of the month” right at primary time, before the opposition can knock him down. Amen.
Funny how the mormon guy is the one with only one wife, yet Newt….
This just proves what we knew all along — that Gingrich was another “pro-choice” liberal who used and abused the pro-life movement to get ahead.
Under no circumstances will a man who tried to send billions to Planned Parenthood ever get my vote. If he wins the nomination, I will stay home.
Pro-abortion politicians will NEVER EVER EVER get my vote.
It is not surprising that Newt is complex. It goes with the territory of genius. At the time he was co-sponsoring legislation with Pelosi he was probably at a low point in his personal and spiritual life. His unfaithfulness to his wife at that time is an open book. His ego was full of Washington power and many have found it is a toxic brew. He now knows and openly admits his failings. As for his apparent turnaround on some major issues some of it is spiritual and some intellectual. Anyone that has ever put brain matter to work on problems is constantly evolving. And anyone who has has ever sinned knows we need redemption.
Most prolifers today are probably more convinced and knowlegable about prolife issues now than they were last year or five years ago. What about Abby Johnson or the late great Bernard Nathanson? Do we assign them to a trash heap because they were once proaborts?
I am not in Newt’s camp but at the same time I am not ruling out support for him. We could do a heck of a lot worse–look at what we have right now in the White House! I cannot imagine a President Gingrich (or a President Romney)vetoing a piece of prolife legislation presented to them.
So, did this Act ultimately die in the Senate?
Elizabeth, no, it died in the House.
I don’t think that bill is okay in any way, but this was 22 years, Newt Gingrich must of had a conversion because he has a strong pro life record now. Abby Johnson used to work in a Planned Parenthoood clinic and now she is a pro life ambassador. People can change, and I don’t think Newt should be judged on something he supported that long ago.
xalisae – you and I can finally agree on something – Ron Paul!
I agree, abyssinia, people do change and Abby is a great example…but this is also in light of all that he’s been doing in the past week or two flip flopping on his stance.
Personally, I didn’t support him before and I still don’t – but your right, maybe he has changed from this example.
Newt’s willingness to embrace the moment of fertilization as the beginning of human life is for me an indication of the truthfulness of his conversion and of his new outlook on life issues and politics. If Newt was concerned simply about getting elected he would not have made this clarification. Those on the extreme left, and the sellers of contraceptives, will not forgive him for this statement. If he flips or flops on life issues again he is toast, and I am sure he knows it. Really, I think he has run out of room to flip or flop again, he has exhausted all reasonable options. This admission, this willingness to protect the smallest human beings, was a huge political statement. It brought light where there was once darkness. Perhaps JPII did rub-off on him!!!!
Jill,
It’s obvious that you don’t like Newt and I have reservations about him, but not to your level.
Having said that, I would rather have a repentant person who has chosen as an adult to convert to a strong pro-life denomination like Catholicism, than a guy like Romney who is clearly a RINO and I believe not serving Christ as he is not even a religious Mormon, much less a strong Christian. I cannot excuse Romneycare in MA either, which ObamaCare is modeled after.
Ron Paul gives us a whole ‘nother set of issues. He is a libertarian and does not believe we should be involved in things like the military defense of Israel. As a Christian I feel it is our duty to defend the Holy Land and prohibit the evil one and his consorts – in this case Islam, from changing the Lord’s set times and seasons (see book of Daniel). Ron Paul’s philosophical base will also keep him from vigorously changing proabortion rhetoric and laws at a national level as he has specifically stated he believes it is a state’s issue.
I like Santorum and Bachmann both. I am praying that either one of them would get traction. Otherwise I will go with Newt.
Newt schmoozing Pelosi. Pelosi now threatens Newt with “dirt”.
Will these conservatives and Republicans who want so desperately to “get along” ever figure out that the friendly crocodile is only eying its next meal?
Amy1,
I like Bachmann and Santorum too. But you know what, they will gain traction if we, you and I, and all the pro-life community gives them traction. The media, especially the liberal media, will not give them any consideration, if they can.
Think it this way, Romney & Gingrich are the two that out of all the candidates are closer to the liberal world and its values. That’s why the media loves them so much and tell us over and over that they are the only “elecatble” ones.
I think we all need to recognize this misguided , malicious influence and go”against the current” seeking who really has true values and has lived them out consistently. It’s up to all of us to give traction to the people who live out these true values!
Richard –
I will ask you the same thing I ask everybody else who makes that point.
How much $money$ have YOU donated to Santorum and Bachmann?
You know as well as I do that that is how elections are won in this nation. It really is time for Jesus people to start putting our money where our rhetoric is.
And, yes I have donated to both their campaigns, but not to Romney – who doesn’t need my money anyway – nor to Newt because, as I mentioned, I am holding out on any support for him unless he is the only choice. I also donated to Perry early because I so appreciated his Response prayer gathering, and I think the Lord appreciated it, too!
Yes Amy1.
i agree. I donate too.
However, it’s important to get the message out to people who think ”well I am going to send money only to those who already have $ and media says are “electable”, because I wan’t to be on the winners side”.
If everybody said “I am not going to send money to Romeny or Gingrich or Obama, for that matter, because they don’t represent my values and send it instead to these others” although the media will still push for them, I am sure they would not be hgih in the polls and the more value-driven candidates would win.
Who cares if that is an old bill? Just last week, Newt said that life did NOT begin at conception. Sure, he walked that back in a prepared statement after he got in trouble, but he was speaking off the cuff and from the heart when he said life only began at “successful implantation.”
Newt has a history of changing his positions not just every other decade or every other year, but EVERY OTHER MINUTE.
On matters of life, he simply cannot be trusted.
I’m not sure that a bankrupt USA can defend Israel at all. At least Ron Paul would stop giving 7x the cash to her enemies, as well as a lot of military weapons.
Someone who is pro- torture, assassination, war…. well if we are going to kill Iranian scientists with “plausible deniability”, why not abortionists, and ought Santorum and Gingrich say they will pardon George Tiller’s assassin, after all if merely threatening innocent life can get an american citizen assassinated – no trial, no due process – what about someone with more deaths than caused by Al Queda? Not that I would suggest violence, but they are the ones saying they will break any treaty, domestic, or international law to get at “them”. Who might take 1000 per year, while here 1000000 per year are slaughtered. But I guess conservatism means infants in their mother’s wombs are far less valuable than secular Israeli citizens.
If you defund *everything* you defund the culture of death.
I think it is a little far-reaching to condemn Newt over legislation that he supported 20 years ago. Heck, 20 years ago before my conversion I would have supported it too, but I’ve changed and grown since then and continue to do so today. I’d like to think that Newt has as well since his conversion.
Give Rick Perry a second look. He has the strongest pro-life record for the unborn of all the candidates.