Getting fed all the news at Free Republic?
Haven't donated yet?
Please consider it
Give whatever you can
Or sign up to donate monthly
and a sponsoring FReeper will contribute $10
Lazamataz is fading away!
Posted on 04/28/2011 12:58:24 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
The Indiana House of Representatives voted 66-32 on Wednesday to approve a controversial bill tightening the state's abortion restrictions and cutting off funding to Planned Parenthood, which now awaits the signature of Gov. Mitch Daniels (R), a potential presidential candidate who has yet to comment publicly on the politically sensitive legislation.
Daniels has seven days to take action on the bill, and has three options once it arrives on his desk: 1) Sign the bill into law; 2) Veto the bill; 3) Do nothing, and allow the bill to become law after seven days without taking a stance.
Daniels' decision on signing the bill will likely provide the clearest indication yet of which way he's leaning on a presidential bid. If he signs it, Daniels can proudly tout two blockbuster legislative achievements -- the abortion bill, along with his recently passed landmark education reform bill -- and enter the Republican primary with two significant ideological victories under his belt, providing him an incredible running start in the slow-developing contest.
If he vetoes the bill, Daniels effectively confirms the suspicions of social conservatives who cringe at the idea of compromising on sensitive issues like abortion -- and in doing so, provides the strongest indication yet that he's putting state governance over presidential politics.
The legislation would introduce some of the nation's strictest anti-abortion laws to the Hoosier State, including a provision that outlaws abortions performed after the fetus reaches 20 weeks -- four weeks earlier than under current state law. Indiana would join Idaho, Kansas, Nebraska and Oklahoma as the only states that outlaw abortions after 20 weeks.
A potential sticking point for Daniels, however, is the recent inclusion of a provision that cuts off funding for Planned Parenthood, the non-profit agency that provides reproductive health services to millions of women, including many of the state's Medicaid patients. Roughly half of Indiana births are covered by Medicaid, and Planned Parenthood's 28 state offices performed more than 5,500 abortions last year alone. Here's where it gets tricky for Daniels: due to federal statutes that prohibit states from selectively allocating funds to agencies that serve Medicaid recipients, the measure could cost Indiana millions of federal Medicaid dollars if it becomes law.
Yet despite internal Republican concerns over the Planned Parenthood provision, which was tacked on by the state Senate and approved by the bill's author, state Rep. Eric Turner (R), the bill passed on Wednesday with only slightly less support than last month, when the original version was approved by a 72-23 vote. The fight is far from over, however, as Planned Parenthood has indicated that it will seek an immediate injunction if and when the bill becomes law.
The bill provides a unique opportunity for Daniels, who will announce his presidential decision after the legislative session ends on Friday, to prove his social bona fides in the eyes of conservative voters who have viewed him with suspicion since he famously called for a "truce" on social issues in order to address the country's fiscal crisis.
Daniels has remained tight-lipped on the abortion measure, playing his political cards typically close to the vest. Several Indianapolis insiders say no one -- not even the bill's major sponsors -- have any idea which way Daniels is leaning on the legislation, which has been methodically working its way toward his desk. Daniels' office did not respond to a request for comment.
Getting a read on Daniels' decision is difficult: Despite his consistently conservative record, Daniels has bluntly rejected the rigid ideology embodied by some members of his party. And after taking a beating for his "truce" proposal, he boldly doubled down on the idea during his speech to CPAC, declaring that "Purity in martyrdom is for suicide bombers." Despite the appeal of signing a bill curtailing abortion allowances, which Daniels surely favors, the prospect of losing millions of federal Medicaid dollars will undoubtedly trouble the fiscally focused governor.
On the other hand, Daniels is too politically savvy not to recognize the importance of evangelicals and social conservatives to the campaign of any presidential candidate vying for the GOP nomination. And lost in the furor over his "truce" idea was the fact that Daniels hasn't been shy about touting his pro-life record. During a February appearance on Laura Ingraham's radio show, Daniels said, "You know, ours has been without question the most pro-life administration in our state's history. We haven't just talked about it, we have advanced the right-to-life."
Those words, spoken on a program that reaches millions of Republicans, appeared aimed at assuaging the concerns of social conservatives who had grown wary of the governor. But for voters -- especially those invested in hot-button social issues -- actions speak louder than words.
Whatever his decision, the next seven days may very well reveal whether Daniels plans on running for president in 2012.
CLICK ABOVE LINK FOR THE VIDEO
Put up or shut. Sign the bill or stay in Indiana.
Now, I am not a social conservative, but stand firm on the abortion issue. I have said for years now that attacking this on the federal level is doomed to failure, that the way to defeat this is to make it a states rights issue. For taking this stand I have been called everything but a human being. Yet, here we are, with the states taking the lead on the issue, as it should be. I surely hope he signs it, if he does not, just leave it and let it pass....
Hey Governor how about a truce on jobs?
The PP provision pretty much dooms it, however. Even if Daniels signs it, PP will almost certainly get their injunction and the law will be void.
If they wanted to smack Planned Parenthood, the place to do it would have been in the budget.
Stupid, stupid, stupid.
Even if some idiot is for abortion being legal it does NOT follow that the government should pay for it.
I would think.
But the evidence seems to indicate that those who think its fine to slaughter unborn babies DO WANT government to pay for it.
To the leftist mind, if abortion is legal then everyone is “entitled” to one paid for by others.
Sans testiculi? We shall see.
Daniels ping.
-he signs the bill
-he is running
-he starts to cut into MITTSTERS support
When is his first trip to Des Moines? Wait and see.
Even if he didn’t make his very silly “truce” statement, spending is not a “social issue” expect in the minds of the far left. And “truce” doesn’t mean he’s switched to social liberal and will veto social conservative bills, rather that he doesn’t want the legislature to focus on social issues. It’s out of his hands, legislatures will do what they want.
That’s why his “truce” statement was idiotic. To the media it was the same as announcing he is now pro-abortion and gay marriage and they’ll call him a rotten fink liar if he signs the bill. He needs to learn to not open himself up to needless attacks.
If he vetoes we’ll know for sure he’s a twit. I expect him to sign.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.