If there is one thing I have run out of, it is patience with the GOP. This started after the abysmal showing in the Presidential election of 2012. Since that time, we have seen a continual slide towards the acceptance of amnesty for illegal immigrants. That, along with other pandering, was aimed at Hispanic voters. The GOP seemed set on the idea that 2012 was lost because of alienation of Hispanics. Never mind that so many conservatives stayed home because they didn’t want to vote for Mitt Romney. This shows a complete lack of conviction on the part of the GOP leadership and a lack of nerve to follow whatever convictions they may happen to have. That lack of conviction has again been placed on display for everyone to see.
For two years, certain members of the GOP have been working on a bill that would criminalize virtually every abortion performed after 20 weeks, with some exceptions for rape or incest. It appeared to be headed towards certain passage in the House of Representatives, until last week. That’s when grumblings started to surface. Some members of the GOP were afraid passing the bill would alienate women voters.
Fox News – The failed bill, which reflected the idea that a fetus can feel pain at 20 weeks, would have criminalized virtually all abortions for pregnancies of 20 weeks or longer. It would offer some exceptions, including for victims of rape that have already been reported to authorities.
But some Republicans, including female members of Congress, objected to that requirement, saying that many women feel too distressed to report rapes and should not be penalized. A 2013 Justice Department report calculated that just 35 percent of rapes and sexual assaults were reported to police.
“The issue becomes, we’re questioning the woman’s word,” Rep. Renee Ellmers, R-N.C., said earlier Wednesday. “We have to be compassionate to women when they’re in a crisis situation.”
There were also objections to the bill’s exemption for minors who are victims of incest and have reported the incident.
“So the exception would apply to a 16-year-old but not a 19-year-old?” said Rep. Charles Dent, R-Pa. “I mean, incest is incest.”
There was concern that the bill would have looked bad for the Republican Party as it struggles to court female voters in the 2016 presidential and congressional elections, and primary and general election candidates could have turned the vote around on the Republicans. The GOP also wants to demonstrate that it can focus on issues that matter to voters and not get bogged down in gridlock.
Abortions performed after 20 weeks are considered to be late-term abortions. The unborn infant is able to feel pain and can react to stimuli from outside the womb. Even the most hardened of hearts should be able to see what a travesty abortion really is, especially after 20 weeks. It’s not about a woman’s choice to kill her unborn child, but rather about giving that child the opportunity to be born and live its life. It is about protecting the lives of our most vulnerable of God’s creation. Instead of doing that, the GOP is running scared of how it may affect the outcome of the 2016 Presidential election. To that, I would like an answer to this question. What good is winning the White House if our party is unwilling to take a stand and prevent as many murders of unborn children as possible?
I understand that this bill had little chance of becoming law, due to a sure veto by President Obama. He will certainly refuse to sign any legislation that contains anything that remotely resembles a restriction on abortion. But, iss something like this not worth taking a stand for? If not, then when do we stop backtracking on everything we believe in and start taking that stand? Do we need to allow abortion all the way until the pregnancy is full term, lest we alienate women voters? Please understand, I am not against women’s rights. I am not against them obtaining health care or any other service they need. This is not about that, or their right to privacy. It is about protecting as many unborn children as possible.
David Harsanyi points out that the placing limits on abortion has a broad support across a variety of different polls. And he isn’t not nearly as tactful as I am about pointing out how the GOP has failed by pulling the bill.
Human Events – Evidently, Republicans don’t feel competent enough to make a case against infanticide. Why else would the GOP pull its 20-week abortion limit bill?
Here’s a short list of things that are less popular than banning late-term abortions: “Acting” on climate change. “Free” community college. Taxing the wealthy. Building the Keystone XL pipeline. President Barack Obama. Future President Hillary Clinton. Every Republican who’s thinking about running for president.
A new Marist poll finds that 84 percent of Americans favor some level of further restrictions on abortion. And regardless of their feelings about the legality of the procedure, 60 percent believe it to be “morally wrong.” If you aren’t keen on that poll — it was sponsored by the Knights of Columbus, after all — you can take your pick of others.
A Quinnipiac poll found that 60 percent of women support limiting abortions to the first 20 weeks of pregnancy. A CBS News poll found that 60 percent of Americans think abortion “should not be permitted” or available only under “stricter limits.” A CNN poll found that 58 percent of Americans believe abortion should be legal only in a “few circumstances” or “always illegal.”
Yet the GOP caves on a bill that would prohibit most abortions after 20 weeks and promises instead to pass another worthless ban on taxpayer-funded abortions — which we all know can be ignored by hiring an accountant.
Polls change. Polls don’t make you right. I know. But this week marks the 42nd anniversary of Roe v. Wade. And while the media continue to treat every Obama non-starter and crowd-pleaser as a genuine policy idea, the 20-week abortion ban was predictably framed as another divisive play by zealous conservatives. Controversial. Republican leaders helpfully confirmed this perception by abandoning the only bill their party has come up with in years that has been widely supported.
David Harsanyi is right. Polls do not necessarily may a position right or wrong, but it is clear how much support placing limits on abortion has in America. You should read the rest of his post on Human Events. It is worth taking your time to read and he is very frank about his disappointment at what has happened.
Of course, the media was already loading their guns for when the bill was passed by the GOP. They were ready and willing to paint anyone who voted for this bill as a hater of women and any other inaccurate term they could coin. It is possible this played a role in decision by the GOP to pull the bill from consideration. It is worth noting that the Democrats tried to do this with the 2014 election. They tried every tactic in the book to describe the GOP as haters of women. As you can see from the result, that didn’t work out so well for them.
What amazes me is how turncoat some Republicans have been on this issue. Again, from Human Events.
A big part of that attack was focused on abortion. It stopped working. So someone needs to inform House Republicans of this. Because the most mystifying aspect of the GOP’s retreat on the 20-week ban is that the 20-week ban is not new. Most of these same Republicans voted on the same legislation before the midterm elections, including some of the same representatives who reportedly withdrew their support for the bill. Nearly every GOP candidate running in the midterms publicly backed the idea, even in high-profile races in which Democrats made abortion the central issue of their campaign.
Why support the bill during the election, or at least the idea of the bill, and then, after you have won your election, turn your back on it? It just makes no sense to me, especially when it is clear that most Americans support the measure. The only answer I can come up with is the same one put forth by David Harsanyi.
This is about politics. Tragically incompetent politics. Even though a veto was imminent, you have to wonder: If the party representing the pro-life position, a party with a sizable majority, can’t pull together a vote on an issue as unambiguous and risk-free as this one, what are the chances of it coming to a consensus and offering compelling arguments on issues such as health care and tax reform? Very little, I imagine.
How true that paragraph is. President Obama is well known for his stance on abortion. He wants women to have 24-7 access to abortion, all the way to the end of the pregnancy. No restrictions, lest we infringe upon their right to choose. If the GOP is unable to articulate an argument against such freely available abortion and for placing limits on this barbaric practice, especially when so many Americans want that to happen, then I have to wonder what good are they actually doing in Washington.