A new poll out from SBA List shows the American people agree: Abortion is not Healthcare!

The surveys asked registered voters about abortion funding and healthcare reform in the following members’ districts:  Jason Altmire (PA-04), Paul Kanjorski (PA-11), Brad Ellsworth (IN-11), Baron Hill (IN-09), Steve Dreihaus (OH-01), Charlie Wilson (OH-06), Marcy Kaptur (OH-09), and John Boccieri (OH-16).

The results tell a clear, consistent story: Constituents represented by pro-life Democrats DO NOT want abortion funding in healthcare – and are much more likely to vote against there Representative next Election Day if he or she supports a healthcare bill with abortion funding.



The pro-life majorities in Pennsylvania, Ohio and Indiana are reflected of the national trend. Americans do not want abortion in health care and are speaking out against it. Representatives beware, constituents are holding their representatives accountable: No federal funding for abortions – period!

    An Associated Press article released Monday says Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV), the Senate Majority Leader, is pro-life. While Reid would like his conservative constituents to believe this, he has proven through his actions that he is in no way, shape, or form pro-life.

    The article, titled “Senate Leader Harry Reid faces tough re-election”, discusses Reid’s growing unpopularity among Nevada voters. The statement in question reads, “Reid, a Mormon, is conservative on gun control [and] opposes abortion rights.”

    However, Reid has cast consistently pro-abortion votes in the Senate:

•    Voted NO on an amendment that would prohibit the United Nations Population Fund from giving money to organizations that promote coercive abortion and forced sterilization. The bill failed 39-55.
•    Voted NO on defining the unborn child as eligible for state-funded health coverage. SCHIP is a federal program that finances health services to children of low-income families. In 2002 President George W. Bush instituted the “unborn child rule”, which allowed states to include unborn babies under those covered. But since this was an administration rule, not a law, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) offered an amendment to make the rule into law to prevent the Obama administration from ending the rule. The amendment failed 39-59.
•    Voted NO on restoring the Mexico City Policy. The policy prevented U.S. funds from going to any organization that performs or actively promotes abortion overseas. The policy was put into place in 1984 by Pres. Ronald Reagan, ended by Pres. Bill Clinton in 1993, restored by Pres. George W. Bush in 2001, and rescinded again by Pres. Obama in his third day in office. Sen. Mel Martinez offered an amendment to restore the policy again and override Obama’s executive order. The amendment failed 37-60.
•    Co-sponsors a bill (S. 487) that mandates federal funding of embryonic stem cell research, which requires the killing of human embryos to harvest stem cells, even though adult stem cell research does not require the death of human embryos and has proven far more successful. The bill is intended to solidify the mandate that Obama restored shortly after taking office.

Perhaps the most important pro-abortion action Reid has taken is supporting federally funded abortion through the “public option” in health care reform, which would be the greatest expansion of abortion since Roe v. Wade.

It is clear as day that Harry Reid unequivocally supports the radical abortion agenda being pushed by Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Planned Parenthood, NARAL, and all their anti-life buddies. Perhaps the AP should check its facts before publishing false claims such as this.

The pro-life Mexico City Policy, instituted by President Reagan, and rescinded by President Obama during his first week in office, will never be in force again, if pro-abortion Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) has his way.

Congressional Quarterly reports,


It's important to note that the Mexico City Policy never limited the amount of federal foreign aid dollars available from the U.S. Government.  What it did accomplish was the establishment of a criterion for the types of organizations eligible for funds: namely, those that did not perform or promote abortion as a method of family planning.

Rescinding the policy last January was far and away one of Obama's least popular decisions, according to Gallup.

Taxpayers don't foot the bill for abortions domestically, and they shouldn't be paying for abortions abroad either.  One of my favorite quotes about the need for the Mexico City Policy is from Grace Olivarez, a dissenting member of John D. Rockefeller III's federal advisory commission on population:

THe USCCB Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities used Grace's statement for an ad campaign earlier this year.  Their advertisements added,


The United States should continue President Reagan's vision of promoting life-affirming foreign aid that lovingly supports both mother an child, not policies that drives them toward the uncaring hands of an abortionist. We'll keep you updated on Senator Lautenberg's amendment as the legislation moves through the Senate.

The Susan B. Anthony List delivered the attached letter, signed by 15 pro-life leaders to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's office today.

A new article posted today on Time magazine’s website admits that Obama is wrong to call claims of abortion-coverage in health care reform bills “fabrications.”

The article says the health care overhaul proposed by House Democrats (H.R. 3200), if enacted, would “mark a significant change” in the federal government’s role in funding abortions. “It would be a dramatic shift,” remarked Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Michigan). Stupak, along with dozens of other House Democrats, has pledge to vote against the final version of reform unless the language is changed to prohibit any kind of publicly funded abortions.

The federal government has a long-standing “hands off” policy for funding of abortion. Since 1976, a law called the Hyde Amendment has prohibited any federal funds from being used for abortion. Private health plans offered to government employees, including members of Congress, have also been barred from covering abortion. The same goes for the military.

The Time article notes that while H.R. 3200 technically does not override these restrictions, but finds a sort of loophole for publicly funded abortion. Under the bill, funds for abortion would be collected only from member dues (premiums) for the proposed “public option” government-run insurance plan. Anyone who signed up for the public plan would be forced to pay for abortion coverage (in an amount “not less than $1 per month), and that is where the problem lies.

“It does represent a policy shift in favor of the abortion-rights community that [would not have happened] under George W. Bush’s administration,” said Glen Halva-Neubauer, a political scientist at Furman University in South Carolina.

Radical abortion supporters claim that this is a compromise where “[American consumers] get to choose which plan they want. They get to choose a plan without abortion,” says Elizabeth Shipp, political director of NARAL Pro-Choice America.

“But for opponents of abortion, including a number of House Democrats, the proposal represents a major reversal of a decades-old policy of keeping the Federal Government out of the abortion business. In a recent letter to members of Congress, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops called the House proposal a ‘radical change’ built around the ‘illusion’ that public funds could be segregated from private funds in a government-run plan or in private plans that accept federal subsidies. ‘Funds paid into these plans are fungible, and federal taxpayer funds will subsidize the operating budget and provider networks that expand access to abortion,’ writes Cardinal Justin Rigali in an Aug. 11 letter to members of Congress,” reads the article.

Stupak, one of the few pro-life Democrats in Congress, has vowed to keep abortion out of the health care bill, saying, “We are going to do everything we can to stop the rule, or the bill, from coming to the floor” for a vote. He added that as many as 39 House Democrats may join him in the effort. This would pose a serious problem because if all 39 did indeed vote against a bill with abortion included, and every House Republican did as well, there would be a tie of 217 yeas to 217 nays.

It is unclear how the Senate will handle abortion in health care, but this much is clear: Obama is using the same tactics he used during the campaign to coerce some pro-lifers into voting for him as he is now with abortion in health care. President Obama, stop misleading the American people, and tell the truth!

To read today's Washington Times editorial on abortion in health care, click here
To read the full Time article, click here

The debate about the current health care reform legislation in Congress has received a lot of media attention and is an important issue: it will serve to define the relationship between health care and abortion.  Is abortion just another medical procedure morally equivalent to having one’s tonsils taken out?  Many physicians in the 19^th century did not think so.  In fact, a large number of them worked diligently to curtail abortion. 

Dr. Frederick Dyer wrote a book titled The Physicians’ Crusade Against Abortion that shares the history of caring physicians who believed in defending life.  During the 19^th century, many physicians became alarmed by the incidence of abortion.  Dr. Horatio Storer started what is referred to as the “physicians’ crusade against abortion.” Dr. Storer and many of his colleagues lobbied state legislatures and successfully encouraged the passage of laws restricting abortion, many of which remained intact until Roe v. Wade in 1973.  The political arena was not the only place in which pro-life physicians spoke out for life.  According to Dyer, these physicians also worked to inform women that life begins at conception and to persuade them to continue their pregnancies.  According to Dyer, many women who intended to terminate their pregnancies chose life because of the work of Dr. Storer and his followers.

Dr. Frederick Dyer has also written a biography of Horatio Storer, titled Champion of Women and the Unborn: Horatio Robinson Storer, M.D.  In addition to fighting for the lives of unborn children, Storer was one of the first people to specialize in treating women’s diseases and had a great impact on the field of gynecology.  This biography provides many details about Storer’s life from his early childhood to his medical career to his struggles with illness late in life. 

Many currently practicing physicians and healthcare professionals follow in the footsteps of Dr. Storer and his colleagues- they believe that elective abortion is the unjust ending of a human being’s life.  Any health care reform should respect the consciences of pro-life healthcare professionals and not force them to perform or refer for procedures to which they are morally opposed. 

In this video clip from a town hall meeting, a constituent asks Representative Zoe Lofgren to explain why the proposed health care reform plan will cover abortions when 90% of them are elective and not medically necessary.  In her response, Represenative Lofgren admits that the health care reform plan will cover abortions and declares her belief that this is the way it should be.  Interestingly, the crowd responded negatively to Lofgren's answer, even though she represents a highly Democratic district in which 69% of the voters supported Obama last November.  (HT: Hot Air)

   

Today Rasmussen Reports published polling data that show that support for the proposed health care reform legislation is continuing to wane and is now at its lowest point to-date!  Only 43% of U.S. voters support the legislation while 52% oppose it.  These numbers show decreased approval for the health care reform plan compared to the end of June 2009 when 50% supported the health care reform legislation and 45% percent opposed it. 

Date	Approve	Disapprove
Aug 9-10	42%	53%
Jul 26-27	47%	49%
Jul 20-21	44%	53%
Jul 10-11	46%	49%
Jun 27-28	50%	45%

Source: Rasmussen Reports

Rasmussen Reports also found that those with strong opinions about the health care debate are more likely to oppose the health care reform legislation than support it.  While 44% of U.S. voters strongly oppose the health care reform plan, only 26% strongly support it. 

In addition, on Tuesday Rasmussen reported that a plurality (41%) of U.S. voters have a favorable impression of people who protest the current health care reform legislation at town hall meetings held by members of Congress and only 35% of U.S. voters have an unfavorable opinion of the protesters.  Clearly, Americans want their opinions on health care reform to be heard.  If your members of Congress are holding town hall meetings near you, please attend and be a voice for life.  We encourage you to respectfully ask your member of Congress questions such as, “Will you oppose any healthcare bill that uses tax dollars to pay for abortions?”  If you would like more sample questions pertaining to life to ask your member of Congress, please see this Stop the Abortion Mandate August Recess Action Toolkit. 

Recently former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin commented on the healthcare reform legislation making its way through Congress.  In her statement, she makes it clear that she is very concerned that the current healthcare legislation would lead to the rationing of healthcare and a devaluation human life. Palin said,    

The Democrats promise that a government health care system will reduce the cost of health care, but as the economist Thomas Sowell has pointed out, government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost. And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course. The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their “level of productivity in society,” whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil. 
 
Health care by definition involves life and death decisions. Human rights and human dignity must be at the center of any health care discussion. 

Palin’s statement serves as a good reminder of what it really means to be pro-life.  As pro-lifers, we believe in the inherent value of every human life.  Period.  We do not believe that people are only valuable if they are useful, meet a certain standard of intelligence, or are in a position to significantly contribute to society.  We acknowledge that there are differences among people, of couse.  People vary in height, weight, intelligence, beauty, level of ambition, personality, and countless other ways.  However, we don’t believe any of these differences has a bearing on how valuable a peron’s life is.  Physically fit people and disabled people are equally valuable; the mentally challenged and the precocious are equally valuable.  Pro-lifers believe in the value and dignity of every human life, born and unborn.  Since all people are equally human, everyone- regardless of other characteristics- has an equal right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. 

Based on statements that President Obama and people involved in his administration have made, we have good reason to believe that under the proposed healthcare reform people will not be treated equally, but will be discriminated against based on their perceived worth to society.  Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, an Obama health care advisor and brother to Rahm Emanuel, made the following statement in the Hastings Center Report, volume 26, no. 6, page 13: 

…services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens are not basic and should not be guaranteed. An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia. 

Unlike the pro-life community, Dr. Emanuel seems to think that people are valuable based on their utility to society, not simply by virtue of their humanity.  For more on utilitarianism and rationing healthcare, see this recent blog post. 

Sarah Palin ended her statement on the proposed healthcare reform by saying this: 

We must step up and engage in this most crucial debate. Nationalizing our health care system is a point of no return for government interference in the lives of its citizens. If we go down this path, there will be no turning back. Ronald Reagan once wrote, “Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth.” Let’s stop and think and make our voices heard before it’s too late. 

Like Palin said, it is time to take a stand for Life and make our voices heard.  Since Congress will not be passing healthcare reform until after they come back from their recess this September, we have been given an opportunity to voice our concerns about government-run healthcare to our senators and representatives.  Contact your senators and representative about healthcare reform today!  

   
    A fake “compromise” amendment that adds federal funding of abortion to the House version of the health-care overhaul bill was approved late Thursday night.

    The amendment was offered in the House Energy & Commerce Committee by Rep. Lois Capps (D-California), who claimed it was a “compromise” between pro-life advocates and abortion supporters.

    The amendment explicitly allows the Health & Human Services Department, whose secretary is the pro-abortion Kathleen Sebelius, to include abortion in the services paid for by the proposed “public option” insurance program, which would be run by the federal government and funded by tax dollars.

    The amendment would become law only if the Hyde Amendment, a law specifically prohibiting federal tax dollars from funding abortions, is reversed. This amendment was offered in 1976 by the late Congressman Henry Hyde, one of the most active and vocal pro-lifers to ever serve in Congress.  However, his amendment is in great danger of being reversed by the current Congress, which has a pro-abortion majority.

    The Capps amendment was passed 30-28, despite opposition from both Republicans and Democrats. (To see a record of the vote, click here.)

    Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) blasted the amendment, saying it “[makes] abortion services not only available, but ‘cheaper and more affordable’? That's not a principle I can endorse.”
 
    Douglas Johnson, the legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), said the Capps amendment was “the latest refinement of the phony ‘common ground’ campaign.” NRLC’s records show that Capps has cast 74 votes to promote abortion or block restrictions on abortion during her 11-year congressional career.

    Over 100,000 letters have already been sent to Congress urging our representatives to keep abortion out of any health care reform effort. Have you sent yours?

Congressman Mike Pence (R-IN) has introduced a pro-life amendment to defund Planned Parenthood.  Last night, the House Rules Committee decided to allow the entire House of Representatives to have an up or down vote on Pence’s amendment.  Congressman Pence’s amendment is very short and succinct.  This is the amendment:

“None of the funds made available under this Act shall be available to Planned Parenthood for any purpose under title X of the Public Health Services Act.” 

The vote on Pence’s amendment will take place today.  This morning Congressman Pence spoke on the House floor about his amendment.  Pence said, “The largest abortion provider in America should not also be the largest recipient of federal funding under Title X.”  See Congressman Pence’s speech below.

 

 

If this amendment passes it would cut off federal funding for the largest abortion provider in the United States!  Here is what you can do to encourage your Representative to vote “yes” on the Pence amendment. 

 

1. Call the House switchboard at 202-225-3121

 

2. Ask the operator to connect you to your Representative's office. If you do not know who your Representative is, please click here to enter your zip code to find your Representative.

 

3. Tell the staff member who answers the phone that you are a constituent. You want your Representative to vote YES on the Pence Amendment to De-Fund Planned Parenthood, because you do not want your tax dollars funding the largest abortion provider in America.

 

Thanks for your action on this item!  We will keep you updated about the results of the vote on the amendment.

   
    TODAY, July 23, the president of the Susan B. Anthony List, Marjorie Dannenfelser, will participate in a live webcast with an all-star lineup of pro-life leaders!

    As you may or may not have been hearing, powerful abortion lobbyists and pro-abortion members of Congress are pushing taxpayer funded abortion as a part of the proposed $1,000,000,000,000.00 health care package. We are already funding abortion providers through the reversal of the Mexico City Policy, but you could be paying for abortions in the United States on a massive scale.

    Last year, Planned Parenthood (the nation’s largest abortion chain) received more than $350 million of taxpayer money. They ended the year with a $112 million surplus. This means that our tax dollars are the only thing keeping Planned Parenthood a profitable operation. And now they want even more!

    In this webcast, you will learn exactly what is at stake, how it is happening, what we are doing about it, and how you can help. This is one of the most crucial battles in the 36 years since Roe v. Wade. Now, pro-life and pro-family organizations are uniting to fight against this massive assault on life and conscience.

    Here is a list (in alphabetical order) of all the pro-life leaders who will be taking part in this 70-minute, live, one-time only webcast. You will even be able to ask questions during the Q&A session!

•    David Bereit, Founder and National Director of 40 Days for Life
•    Marjorie Dannenfelser, President of the Susan B. Anthony List
•    Kristen Day, Executive Director of Democrats for Life
•    Melinda Delahoyde, President of CareNet crisis pregnancy centers
•    Day Gardner, Founder and President of the National Black Pro-Life Union
•    Peggy Hartshorn, President of Heartbeat International
•    Kristan Hawkins, Executive Director of Students for Life
•    Mike Huckabee, former governor and presidential candidate; host of the Fox News show Huckabee
•    Douglas Johnson, Legislative Director of the National Right to Life Committee
•    Dr. Richard Land, President of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission
•    Tom Minnery, Senior Vice President of Government and Public Policy for Focus on the Family
•    Carmen Pate, host of the nationally syndicated radio show Point of View
•    Fr. Frank Pavone, Founder and National Director of Priests for Life
•    Tony Perkins, President of the Family Research Council
•    Congressman Joe Pitts, Republican from Pennsylvania’s 16th district
•    Jim Sedlak, Vice President of American Life League and Executive Director of Stop Planned Parenthood (STOPP)
•    Congressman Chris Smith, Republican from New Jersey’s 4th district
•    Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women for America
•    Dr. Charmaine Yoest, President & CEO of Americans United for Life

    You will need an Internet connection to listen to the webcast and ask questions, and the webcast will work with dial-up connections too. However, you will need to register for the webcast to be able to listen. If you cannot listen at 9 pm Eastern on Thursday, you can register and a full recording will be available shortly after the webcast concludes.

    Please visit www.stoptheabortionmandate.com for more information and to register. It’s going to be a great event!

Today in the House Labor and Education Committee Congressman Mark Souder (R-IN) introduced a pro-life amendment to the healthcare reform bill (H.R. 3200) that would prohibit the government from mandating that all insurance plans cover abortions.  During the Labor and Education Committee discussion of this amendment, Congresswoman Woolsey (D-CA) compared an abortion to having one’s tonsils removed.  Watch the discussion here:

In the video, Congressman Cassidy (R-LA) pointed out that a human fetus and a tonsil are substantively different.  A tonsil is not a whole, living, and distinct human being; a human fetus is.  Both traditional and modern embryology textbooks plainly state this biological fact.  Consider the following quotes:

"[The zygote], formed by the union of an oocyte and a sperm, is the beginning of a new human being."

-Keith L. Moore, Before We Are Born: Essentials of Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2008. p. 2.

"Every time a sperm cell and ovum unite a new being is created which is alive and will continue to live unless its death is brought about by some specific condition."

-E.L. Potter and J.M. Craig, Pathology of the Fetus and the Infant, 3rd edition. Chicago: Year Book Medical Publishers, 1975. p. vii.

“Human development begins at fertilization, the process during which a male gamete or sperm…unites with a female gamete or oocyte (ovum) to form a single cell called a zygote.  This highly specialized, totipotent cell marked the beginning of each of us as a unique individual."

"A zygote is the beginning of a new human being (i.e., an embryo)."

-Keith L. Moore, The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology, 7th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders, 2003. pp. 16, 2.

Biology cannot tell us how human beings should be treated.  Biology cannot tell us whether fetuses, or any human beings for that matter, should have the right to life, liberty, or happiness.  Biology can tell us, however, that a human fetus is a whole, albeit small and undeveloped, human being while a tonsil is not.  Biology can tell us that an abortion ends the life of a human being while a tonsillectomy does not.  Regardless of her beliefs about what types of rights unborn children should be given, there is no excuse for Congresswoman Woolsey to equate an entire class of human beings to tonsils.

    The Senate version of the health care overhaul bill, passed 13-10 on party lines last Wednesday, would force insurance companies to sign contracts with abortion providers. Such a requirement would mandate that insurance companies pay for abortions with your insurance premiums, in addition to your taxpayer dollars.

    The amendment, added by Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Maryland), has broad language which has phrases mandating unspecified “preventive care and screenings” for pregnant women. It also requires insurance companies participating in government-subsidized plans to include in their networks “essential community providers”.

    When Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) asked Mikulski to clarify, she admitted that the amendment would cover “women’s health clinics” and Planned Parenthood clinics. When Sen. Hatch suggested adding language to specifically prohibit abortion from the amendment, Sen. Mikulski replied, “No, I would not be willing to do that at this time.”

    If the bill passes, it would create a loophole which would undermine the Hyde Amendment, which has prohibited use of taxpayer dollars to fund abortions since 1976.

    Sen. Mike Enzi (R-Wyoming), Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma), and Sen. Hatch all offered amendments to restrict abortion coverage, but they were all rejected by the Democrats, who hold a majority in the committee. Mikulski’s amendment was passed by a narrow majority. Sen. Robert Casey (D-Pennsylvania) was the only Democrat to vote against her amendment.

    “The way it’s written, I believe it’s too broad and…it could be interpreted down the road [to] include something like abortion, and I’m concerned about that – the breadth of that and the scope of it, and for that reason I’ll oppose it.” However, Casey did end up voting for the bill as a whole, which does include the Mikulski amendment.

    In a press release, Sen. Enzi said, “We can’t in good conscience force insurance companies to pay for abortions.” Sen. Hatch agreed, saying, “I think it’s a terrible mistake.”

    “The Hyde Amendment says taxpayers – especially those taxpayers who don’t believe in abortion – should not have to be paying for abortions for those who do,” Enzi said.

    When asked about the fact that the bill will allow federal funding of abortion, Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Connecticut) said, “I think we handled the issue well.”

    “We like the idea that people have choices and, indeed, the law of the land permits people to make those choices, and we respect that, and we are going to pursue that,” said Dodd. He claimed he did not want to “discriminate” against people who have “moral convictions and religious convictions,” even though he still voted for the amendment and the final bill.

Both Democratic and Republican members of the House of Representatives will be pushing for a ban on the federal funding of abortion to be included in the healthcare reform bill (H.R. 3200) that is being marked-up this week.  According to Represenative Joe Pitts from Pennsylvania, if there is not an explicit ban on using federal funds for abortions, abortion “will be considered a minimum benefit” under the new healthcare reform plan.  President Obama has made it clear with both his words and actions that he considers reproductive procedures like abortion to be central to healthcare.  On July 17, 2007, Obama made the following remarks about reproductive procedures and healthcare:

Well, look, in my mind reproductive care is essential care, basic care so it is at the center, the heart of the plan that I propose.

 

But, essentially, what we are doing is to say that we’re going to set up a public plan that all persons and all women can access if they don’t have health insurance. It’ll be a plan that will provide all essential services, including reproductive services….

National Right to Life Federal Legislation Director Douglas Johnson said, "We know from a great deal of experience and many court decisions that [an 'essential benefits package'] will include elective abortion unless Congress explicitly says otherwise."  Once abortion is defined as part of an essential benefits package, both public and private insurance plans will be required to cover abortions and American taxpayers will be forced to pay for abortions on-demand.  In addition, according to Johnson many more abortion clinics would have to be opened across the country in order to meet the requirement of health insurance plans to have local access to abortion.   

 

It is imperative that the healtcare reform bill that is passed contains an explicit ban on the federal funding of abortion.  Congressman Pitts has said that he will introduce a ban on using federal funds for abortion in the markup session of the bill in the House Energy and Commerce Committee this week.  According the The Hill, Pitts’ ban is likely to have support from some of the Democratic members on the Energy and Commerce Committee, but other Democrats on the committee will oppose the ban.  Please click hereto tell your Representative that abortion should not be considered an essential part of health care and that you do not want to be forced to pay for abortions.  You can send your Senators the same message here.

  House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) spoke on the floor today about the Restore Our American Mustangs Act (H.R. 1018), a $700 million welfare program for horses and burros.

He addresses today's vote for burros in comparison to last night's vote to allow taxpayer funds for abortions in the District of Columbia.  (The remarks begin at 1:10)

From the transcript of his speech:


Thank you, Rep. Boehner for taking a stand for what's important -- innocent human life.  Keep up the fight!

.
Dr. Charmaine Yoest of Americans United for Life was the official pro-life witness at yesterday's Senate confirmation hearing for Judge Sonya Sotomayor.  She addressed concerns about Sotomayor's position as a Board Member for the radically pro-abortion Puerto Rican Legal Defense Fund.  During her Sotomayor's tenure on the board, the fund filed several amicus brief with the courts, urging a right to taxpayer-funded abortion and challenging New York's parental notification law.