Breaking: New one-week Continuing Resolution defunds DC abortions
UPDATE, 11:20a: To clarify, if this one-week CR is enacted, it will defund abortions in DC throughout the remainder of FY11, not just for one week.
11:01a: Read backstory here.
The Republican-controlled House Appropriations Committee has introduced a third short-term Continuing Resolution, this time to keep the government going through April 15. The current CR expires April 8.
This CR slashes another $12 billion in spending.
As with the previous 2, this CR does not defund Planned Parenthood, but it does give pro-lifers something else of great substance: It reinstates the Dornan amendment (also known as the DC Hyde amendment and/or DC Abortion Ban), which ensures no congressionally appropriated funds (be they local or federal) will pay for abortion in the District of Columbia.
This policy was in place from Fiscal Years 96-09. President Obama and congressional Democrats only nixed this policy in FY10, the only year since FY96 the policy was not attached to the Financial Services Appropriations Act.
Inclusion of the Dornan amendment puts Democrats in a deliciously tough spot. It should not be a deal-breaker because President Obama himself signed the policy into law for FY09 and also voted to continue the policy twice while serving in the US Senate.
Other Democrat pro-abort notables who have previously signed the DC Abortion Ban:
- Senate Majority Leader Dick Durbin included the DC Abortion Funding Ban (Dornan amendment) in his own legislative text twice since Democrats gained control of the Senate in 2007. As Senate Majority Whip, Durbin has voted for legislation including the DC Abortion Funding Ban 9 times since 1995. Durbin also voted for the DC Abortion Funding Ban repeatedly in the 1980s.
- President Clinton signed this policy into law 6 times.
- Vice President Joe Biden voted for legislation including the DC Abortion Funding Ban 7 times since 1995.
- Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi voted for legislation including the DC Abortion Funding Ban 14 times since 1995. In just 4 years as Speaker of the House, Pelosi shepherded 3 bills continuing the DC Abortion Funding Ban for 3 separate fiscal years through the House.
- Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid voted for legislation including the DC Abortion Funding Ban 10 times since 1995. Reid shepherded 3 bills continuing the DC Abortion funding ban for 3 separate fiscal years through the Senate in his just over 4 years as Majority Leader. Reid also voted for the DC Abortion Funding Ban in 1996 – the last time the issue was considered as an individual amendment. Reid also voted for the DC Abortion Funding Ban repeatedly in the 1980s.
- Minority Whip Steny Hoyer voted for legislation including the DC Abortion Funding Ban 18 times since 1995. As Majority Leader, Hoyer shepherded 3 bills continuing the DC Abortion Funding Ban for 3 separate fiscal years through the House.
- Legislation containing the DC Abortion Funding Ban has received more than 150 Democrat votes in the House on 16 occasions since 1995.
It appears Republicans have Democrats over a barrel on this one. Still, pro-aborts will pitch a major fit. This could get interesting.
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.
Great news! Too bad the Dornan/Hyde amendments still allow federal funds for abortion in the cases of rape and incest, but it’s a start.
“Too bad the Dornan/Hyde amendments still allow federal funds for abortion in the cases of rape and incest, but it’s a start”
Wow. So you want poor women to be forced to bear the child of a rape victim or their father’s child. But then as a man, you’ll never be in that situation. Only in the world of the “pro-lifers” can a rapist name his “baby momma.”
CC:
I wouldn’t force the mother to do anything. The rapist committed the crime, not me. Rape is a terrible, horrible crime and rapists should be prosecuted to the fullest extend of the law. But what did that unborn child do to deserve a death sentence?
CC- no one forced a poor woman to do anything- except the rapist. If a woman chooses to get an abortion, it’s legal. Period. Not forcing taxpayers to foot the bill is a separate issue.
Why are children conceived in rape and incest less human than any one else? Why are children being punished with death because of the rapist? This argument doesn’t fly and never will.
And women actually heal better from their rape if they do not abort. There was a book/study done and I believe it was called WIBA …
And CC – just look into the face of Rebecca Kiessling and say that she does not deserve to live. Every time someone says that abortion is just fine is saying that that child has no right to live. This is real. It’s not a game, wedded to an ideology. This is real life. And while life presents us with hard challenges, we can not kill to solve society’s problems.
I’m glad about the defunding. I don’t want to be complicit in the death of humans and harm to women. Let’s spend the money helping women. I won’t, however, want my $ to go to helping pay for women’s abortions.
see http://www.rebeccakiessling.com/index.html
No capital punishment for the children.
CC,
Please visit this website. From everything that I’ve read, having the abortion DOES NOT take the rape away and in most cases just ends up hurting the woman more.
http://www.rebeccakiessling.com
It was a lie about rape that gave the judicial atrocity known as Roe v Wade that little extra push. There should be no rape exception, ever. Now, it’s a terrible crime and nothing magically makes the victim feel better. The child is caught up in it beyond his or her control and doesn’t deserve the death penalty. Statistics I’ve read this past calendar year stated that rape victims who concieve (which is rare) abort at a slightly lower rate than the general population of pregnant women. Which means, if you are a tiny human, you have a better chance at life in the womb of a rape victim than in the womb of a non-white mother living in NYC who engaged in consensual sex.
Extremists like to say, “You don’t understand so you shouldn’t be allowed to decide.” Ya, well, you don’t know what I do and don’t understand. And it’s an illogical way to make policy. I also don’t have a masters degree in nutrition, but I’m pretty sure eating a piece of fruit is healthier than eating a handful of mud. Just because a man can’t get pregnant doesn’t mean he can’t advocate for life.
Only in the world of abortion zealots can people impose the death penalty on a tiny human who has commited no crime.
Rape exceptions are just politicians’ ways of trying to appease the pro-choicers. It should never, ever be used. Life, always.
Well put, ninek.
From reading the predictable comments by CC on many articles here on Jill’s site, there is no possible way that CC takes his or herself seriously.
“Why are children conceived in rape and incest less human than any one else? Why are children being punished with death because of the rapist?”
Why aren’t pro aborts pushing for the death penalty for rapists?
Why punish the victim of rape with the death penalty instead?
From reading the predictable comments by CC on many articles here on Jill’s site, there is no possible way that CC takes his or herself seriously
I take myself quite seriously and that’s why a not insubstantial amount of my money goes to Planned Parenthood. I am a woman who grew up in a regressive Catholic family, in a regressive Catholic parish, in the regressive days pre Roe – although I know what regressive Catholics did if they had a “problem.” I take myself very, very, seriously.
CC I am a Catholic and a member of the church militant. Meaning we are regressive in your eyes. I take my Catholicism very, very seriously. The beliefs you have are quite disordered. Killing unborn humans is a very serious issue. What a shame that you bought in to the lie. I have a friend who constantly defends the abortion issue by saying that you cannot legislate morality. She doesn’t see the FACT that we’ve legislated immorality. Abortion is immoral. I’ll pray for you CC.
She doesn’t see the FACT that we’ve legislated immorality
Your Catholic view of “immorality” isn’t universally held. Hate to break it to ya, but those who aren’t in the fold of Rome don’t embrace it as the “one, true, church.” Funny, the arguments about the “immorality” of abortion are the same as those presented during prohibition – and we know how that turned out.
“Church miliant” – sounds so fascist. No wonder the numbers of the church militant, in my state, are drastically dropping.
Ninek: There should be no rape exception, ever. Now, it’s a terrible crime and nothing magically makes the victim feel better.
I agree with this. Most recently I saw something about proposed (not sure – might have just been for the sake of discussion) later effective dates in gestation for restrictions on abortion in cases of rape, and that to me does not make sense.
Maybe there is something I’m not seeing, but why would the circumstances of conception necessarily make any difference?
____
Just because a man can’t get pregnant doesn’t mean he can’t advocate for life.
Can’t argue with that one either.
Support this? No can do! What part of “defund Planned Parenthood” don’t they (the GOP, that is) understand????
Doug, I disagree with you on things, but I have to say that I find your contribution and comments refreshing. I can see that you strive for intellectual honesty. Just thought I’d mention it :-)
CC:
Typical. You can’t argue with the facts or reasonable questions posed to you, so you attack everyone’s character and religion. If your opinion can’t stand to reason, why believe it?
If you want to ask me why I believe what I believe, I’ll readily answer. That’s the difference between pro-killers and pro-lifers.
CT, thank you. The abortion debate takes us down to the unprovable assumptions we all make, to our basic philosophy, our religion if any, how and what we’ve learned, and the nature of our minds and learning itself. I don’t know of any other topic that does it so well.
Even with the given that it’s very rare for a person on one side of the argument to come around to the other side’s way of thinking, there can be a lot of value in the discussing itself. Here on Jill’s site, I’ve learned some matters of biological and scientific fact about which I was mistaken beforehand, a pleasant surprise for me.
I’ve thought, “What if there were no unwanted pregnancies? What if there were no abortions at all?” There would be a lot of people pleased about it, but then I’d never have met quite a few people here, people that I treasure knowing.