Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pro-Life Policies Quashed (How RINO Ralph Regula Killed Effort to Defund Planned Parenhood)
Focus on the Family ^ | Charles R. MiVille

Posted on 12/11/2001 11:44:06 AM PST by IM2Phat4U

October 23, 2001
Pro-Life Policies Quashed
By Charles R. MiVille, Washington, D.C., correspondent

Pro-life issues have taken a beating in Congress. One amendment recently went down to defeat, and two others were withdrawn before they ever received a vote.

In his campaign for president, then-Gov. George W. Bush pledged his support for funding abstinence education equal to so-called "safe sex" programs. Rep. Ernest Istook, R-Okla., seized the challenge, offering an amendment to the annual funding bill for the Labor, Health and Human Services and Education (Labor/HHS/Education) departments. However, Istook's amendment was crushed in a 106-311 House vote two weeks ago, amid a purported desire among many lawmakers to finish appropriations bills without any additional controversial amendments.

That sentiment apparently impacted two other amendments that never even made it to a vote. One, sponsored by Rep. David Vitter, R-La., would have banned federal "family planning" funds from flowing to abortion providers. Michael Schwartz, vice president of government relations for Concerned Women for America, believes the public is strongly in favor of stopping family planning funds from going to abortionists.

"It is something that is in keeping with the whole point of the family planning program," Schwartz said. "After all, why should we be funding abortionists?"

He noted, however, that Congressman Ralph Regula, chairman of the subcommittee that oversees the Labor/HHS/Education appropriations bill, went to extraordinary lengths to line up votes against the Vitter amendment. Faced with such opposition, Vitter pulled the amendment, vowing to try again next year.

Schwartz said Vitter really had no choice.

Rep. Melissa Hart, R-Pa., also planned to offer her amendment banning federal funds to public schools if they distribute "morning after" pills to students. Before she could offer the amendment, however, House Speaker Dennis Hastert asked her to withdraw it before it came up for a vote.

Hastert reportedly promised Hart a House vote on her legislation at some future time.

Meantime, John Paulton, of Focus on the Family, says pro-lifers have to get busy, "basically to show the elected officials in Congress that the American people won't stand silently by while abortion is funded by their tax dollars."


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abortionlist; catholiclist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-77 next last
To: toenail
Yes, I know that's what their platform says - but at the heart of the majority of Libertarians is a pro-abortion stance. Killing in the name of individual freedom.
21 posted on 12/12/2001 5:44:21 AM PST by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: OkieGrit2; erizona
If we want to get serious about reducing the number of abortions in this country, we must first stop subsidizing the abortion industry with our tax dollars.
22 posted on 12/12/2001 6:20:42 AM PST by IM2Phat4U
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

Here's a great FR thread citing a Wall Street Journal article concerning the foundress of Planned Parenthood:

The Repackaging of Margaret Sanger

23 posted on 12/12/2001 6:32:03 AM PST by IM2Phat4U
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #24 Removed by Moderator

To: IM2Phat4U
Bump!
25 posted on 12/12/2001 10:10:14 AM PST by Gelato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: toenail
The Vitter Amendment, blocked by RINO Congressman Ralph Regula, would have deprived $66 miilion dollars in tax payers' dollars from getting into the hands of America's #1 killer of unborn children. From a previous press release:

Vitter amendment to curb Title X a step in the right direction [But it has been blocked by Regula]

"The federal Title X population control program should be eliminated completely," said Ed Szymkowiak, national director of STOPP International, a division of American Life League. "Although the Vitter Amendment will not do that, it will stop Planned Parenthood from getting about $66 million of taxpayers' money. That's a big step in the right direction."

Rep. David Vitter (R-La.) is expected to offer an amendment which states, "None of the funds appropriated in this Act may be used to make any award of a grant or contract under Title X (ten) of the Public Health Service Act for fiscal year 2002 or any subsequent fiscal year to any private grantee, delegate, or clinic that provides a chemical or surgical abortion." Current appropriations for Title X are $253.9 million.

"The Vitter Amendment has been called a domestic version of the Mexico City Policy," said Szymkowiak. "That policy prevents taxpayer funding of abortion providers overseas. We should at least have a similar policy in the United States as well."

Release issued: 5 Oct 01

26 posted on 12/12/2001 12:26:22 PM PST by IM2Phat4U
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: anniegetyourgun
The libertarians accuse me of being a fascist right-wing religious fanatic and the dyed-in-the-wool Republicans accuse me of being a libertarian. Sigh. Sometimes I guess you just can't please everyone.
27 posted on 12/12/2001 2:25:39 PM PST by Aristophanes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: anniegetyourgun
Yes, I know that's what their platform says - but at the heart of the majority of Libertarians is a pro-abortion stance. Killing in the name of individual freedom.

Just saw this one. Here's my take on it: "Yes, I know that's what their platform says - but at the heart of the majority of [Republicans] is a [cowardly don't-rock-the-boat] pro-abortion stance. Killing [by default]in the name of individual freedom.

28 posted on 12/12/2001 2:28:42 PM PST by Aristophanes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Aristophanes
"but at the heart of the majority of [Republicans] is a [cowardly don't-rock-the-boat] pro-abortion stance. "

And your evidence of this?

29 posted on 12/12/2001 2:52:42 PM PST by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: IM2Phat4U
Thanks for the Ping
(sorry I was so late to reply) J
30 posted on 12/12/2001 6:14:47 PM PST by Fiddlstix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo; He Rides A White Horse; GreatOne; RnMomof7; dandelion; goodieD; st.smith
bump
31 posted on 12/12/2001 9:02:44 PM PST by IM2Phat4U
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: IM2Phat4U
A BUMP for your PING!
32 posted on 12/12/2001 10:40:22 PM PST by dandelion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: IM2Phat4U
Thanks for the ping. Will send email later today when I get home. This is not good that Planned Parenthood continues to hold something over our Congressman to make in do nothing, which, actually, means they are doing something: siding with Planned Parenthood.
33 posted on 12/13/2001 7:20:08 AM PST by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: anniegetyourgun
The lack of any effort whatsoever to ban Partial Birth Abortions. How's that for just one tiny example?
34 posted on 12/13/2001 9:45:05 AM PST by Aristophanes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Aristophanes
Yeah, tell to the many R's who worked so hard to get it passed and to x42's desk only to have him veto it - twice. And tell it to all of the R activists in various states who have pushed similar legislation in their states only to have Clinton judicial appointees strike them down.

I'm not aware of a single other party who brought it up, exposed the practice, and pushed harder to ban the hideous procedure. Sure, there were a few other parties who stood around saying "we're behind you all the way", but of course, they have no ability to pass legislation. And that's what it's all about.

Tell it to the R's who plan to bring it up again in the next session. Tell it to the R president who has promised to sign it.

35 posted on 12/13/2001 9:51:09 AM PST by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: wideawake; ventana; lormand; RooRoobird14; Scholastic; Alberta's Child; Ol' Sparky; JoeSchem...
bump
36 posted on 12/13/2001 10:23:54 AM PST by IM2Phat4U
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: IM2Phat4U
Thank you!!!!! The Vitter Amendment would have been wonderful! We have work to do!
37 posted on 12/13/2001 10:35:51 AM PST by Scholastic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Tabitha Soren
Another reason to be disappointed!
38 posted on 12/13/2001 6:42:39 PM PST by IM2Phat4U
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: anniegetyourgun; OkieGrit2; Aristophanes; toenail
"Although the Vitter Amendment will not do that, it will stop Planned Parenthood from getting about $66 million of taxpayers' money."

I am sticking with the Republicans for now, although I am certainly growing quite discouraged. If Bush does indeed plan to fight for the unborn, why would allow another $66 million to go to Planned Parenthood?

* Planned Parenthood spent millions to defeat Bush.
* Planned Parenthood spent millions to stop Ashcroft
* Planned spent millions to defeat partial birth legislation.

By giving Planned Parenthood $66 million more of taxpayers money, he has strengthened his enemy. If nominates a pro-life judge to the Supreme Court, his enemy will have more resources to attack him. If he initiates legislation to ban partial birth abortion, his enemy will have more resources to defeat it. If he runs for reelection in 2004, his enemy will be stronger than before.

The Clintons would never have allowed $66 million in tax dollars to have gone to a pro-life group. If Bush truly wants to get serious about stopping the American Holocaust, he should start by making sure the modern Nazis at Planned Parenthood stop getting our tax dollars.

39 posted on 12/13/2001 7:03:53 PM PST by IM2Phat4U
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: IM2Phat4U
The Vitter Amendment (similar to the Hyde Amendment, only domestically applied) must come from Congress. W will sign it in a heartbeat.
40 posted on 12/13/2001 7:09:24 PM PST by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-77 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson