Now that the Republicans are in complete control, will they stop my tax dollars from going to this group that not only hates the unborn, but hates the GOP? Not likely, especially when Republican leaders, like pro-abort Tom Davis, are willing to fund pro-abort Republican candidates, i.e., Rayes of Maine, who lost to a pro-life democrat (http://www.sunjournal.com/story.asp?slg=091502Abortion).
And read, ‘GOP warned to take it easy - Right-wing wish list cited as danger to party’ – Chicago Tribune (must register to read article - http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0211100503nov10.story). Here is an excerpt:
By Jill Zuckman Washington Bureau Published November 10, 2002 WASHINGTON -- Now that Republicans will control the House, Senate and White House, everyone from religious conservatives to anti-tax activists to business leaders has begun urging the GOP to push ahead on their pet causes, demanding results as a reward for their loyalty.
But some conservative activists and Republicans are worried that the pressure to quickly satisfy important but narrow GOP constituencies could result in political harm to their party and ultimately their cause.
The last thing the party needs looking toward the next election in 2004 is an extremist image that could prompt voters to turn back to the Democrats, they said…
I hope and pray that Bush does the right thing. We must put pressure on Republicans to defend their party’s platform:
That is why we say the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed... We oppose using public revenues for abortion and will not fund organizations which advocate it." - http://www.rnc.org/GOPInfo/Platform/2000platform4.htm
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 One amendment recently went down to defeat, and two others were withdrawn before they ever received a vote.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."
http://www.family.org/cforum/fnif/news/a0018247.html