FamilyFoundationBlog.com

Courtesy of our friends at the Family Research Council, below are eight documented facts about the inclusion of abortion funding or mandates in the so-called health care “reform” bill. You can click here, as well, to get them in a PDF document.

Eight Reasons Abortion Is in the Health Care Overhaul

1. The legislation specifically includes it. The President’s bill to amend the Senate bill leaves several abortion provisions in place. In Section 1303 it allows tax credit subsidies for plans that include abortion and leaves the abortion surcharge in place. It maintains the proposal to create a multi-state plan that includes abortion in Sec. 1334. Even worse, it would increase the Senate bill funding from $7 billion to $11 billion for community health centers in Sec. 10503 without any abortion funding restrictions. (H.R. 3590, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.)

2. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has said it is. “And I would say that the Senate language, which was negotiated by Senators Barbara Boxer and Patty Murray, who are very strong defenders of women’s health services and choices for women, take a big step forward from where the House left it with the Stupak amendment, and I think do a good job making sure there are choices for women. … That would be an accounting procedure, but everybody in the exchange would do the same thing, whether you’re male or female, whether you’re 75 or 25, you would all set aside a portion of your premium that would go into a fund.” (HotAir.com: “Sebelius: Everyone will pay into abortion-coverage fund“.)

3. Senate Democrats refused to ban it. Instead of allowing for an up or down vote on a Senate amendment similar to the Stupak Amendment in the House which bans federal funding of abortion, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) “tabled” the amendment, effectively killing it. This was the only amendment dealt with in this way. (Vote No. 369 S.Amdt. 2962 to S.Amdt. 2786 to H.R. 3590.)

4. House Pro-life Democrats, who support a government takeover, say it is. “The Senate language is a significant departure from current law and is unacceptable.” (U.S. Representative Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), February 23, 2010, CBS News) … “I think abortion’s wrong. The problem is that I’ve lived too long. When they say they can keep this money separate, I just don’t believe it.” (U.S. Representative Marion Berry (D-Ark.), March 6, 2010, Arkansas News.)

5. House Pro-abortion Democrats say it is. “The good news is that the Senate bill does allow [abortion coverage],” (Chairwoman of the House pro-abortion caucus, Dianne DeGette (D-Colo.), March 5, 2010, Washington Post.)

6. The Abortion industry has sent out alerts in favor of it. The abortion giant Planned Parenthood sent out alerts on March 6, 2010: “President Obama’s health care reform proposal would make a real difference for the women and families who rely on Planned Parenthood. . . . and [the bill] significantly increase access to reproductive health care.” (Planned Parenthood alert, March 6, 2010.)

7. Candidate Obama said it would be included, and the Obama administration includes it in its definition of reproductive health care. Presidential candidate Barack Obama stated he “believes that reproductive health care is basic health care.” (Rhealitycheck.org questionnaire, 2008.) Secretary of State Hillary Clinton followed up on this in 2009: “Reproductive health care includes access to abortion.” (The Cloakroom Blog: “Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, April 22, House Foreign Affairs Committee Hearing.”)

8. House Democratic Majority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) has indicated he wants to “fix” the abortion coverage problem in the Senate bill. “House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said Thursday that lawmakers could draft separate pieces of legislation with abortion language to earn the support of anti-abortion rights Democrats on healthcare reform legislation.” (March 4, 2010: The Briefing Room, The Hill’s blog.)

But if those eight facts aren’t enough to convince your “pro-life” friends who are convinced that anything out of “the annointed one’s” mouth is truth, or just can’t bring themselves to doubt such “moderate” and “Blue Dog Democrats” such as U.S. Senator Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) or our own Mark Warner, here’s 12 more facts and reasons, courtesy of The Cloakroom.

Still not sure? Then check out FRC Action’s resource page: “Standing Against the Government Takeover of Health Care,” as well as why the Hyde Amendment does not apply to the current bill: “Q and A: Government Health Care and Abortion.” Please disseminate this information by using the share program, e-mailing this link to friends and/or posting it to your own social networking sites.

Remember in the fall when President Obama came to Fairfax to campaign for the failed statewide Democrat ticket? He basically told everyone who disagreed with him to “shutup.” Funny how things turn around. The public is disagreeing with him now, and very loudly, saying “No!” to his scheme of a government takeover of our health care system. Now, he’s coming back to Fairfax — tomorrow. Just in time for us to disagree with him, again — and hopefully with the same degree of success he had the last time.

This just in from our friends at Americans For Prosperity and its Virginia director, Ben Marchi:

President Obama will speak in Fairfax tomorrow (Friday) at at George Mason University’s Patriot Center — get directions here. Doors open at 9:00 a.m.

The White House says, “There are no tickets needed for this event, just show up.” So we’re going to. If you want to get inside for the rally, you will likely need to get there early and stand in line. If you want to bring signs to send your message outside the arena, be aware that if you want to go inside afterwards, “no signs or banners are permitted, and those who come are encouraged to limit personal items and not bring bags or purses,” according to the White House Web site.

Then on Saturday, tea party groups from across the nation are coming together to send a resounding “KILL THE BILL” to Capitol Hill. Let’s join them and say “Hands Off My Health Care”!

Saturday at Noon in Upper Senate Park — AFP President Tim Phillips will be speaking along with others. If you can get there earlier, some tea party groups will be rallying starting at 10 a.m. on the East Lawn of the Capitol. For a Capitol Hill map, click here.

Please note: If you’re driving into Washington, D.C., on Saturday, take note of road closures due to the National Marathon. A list of closures and when roads will re-open is available here.

This is crunch time! Look forward to seeing you there!

Ben Marchi

State Director

We’re too busy to know ourselves, sometimes. Where does the time go? It’s as if that 7:00 a.m. sub-committee ended only an hour ago . . . and it’s already 8:oo p.m.? And I still have an hour’s work to do? Really, it seems the mace was carried into the House chamber to open session just a couple of weeks ago. It’s mid-March already? What happened to the snow and the Courts of Justice docket? I’m still seeing bill numbers and unattributed opponents’ talking points in my sleep, thank you very much HB 652.

Enough already of the stream of consciousness . . . besides, thanks to one of our interns this year, Drew Wingard, we have a documentary about the day in the life of The Family Foundation during session. It pretty much captures the crazy pace of the first two months of the year, every year. We think you will enjoy this video very much. Remarkably, it was the first time Drew ever picked up a camera or used a Mac editing program. In it, you’ll see all of your FF favorites: Victoria, Chris, Jessica, Marie, your humble Admin (although a great ad lib of mine was unceremoniously cut), Roger, Dale and Dan’s door. You’ll also see some cameos — Senator Walter Stosch (R-12, Henrico) and former Attorney General and newly confirmed Supreme Court Justice Bill Mims, among them.

A day in the life of The Family Foundation during General Assembly session — it’s no life!

Speaking of earmarks and Congressional attempts to ban them, at least for a year, I just received this from Fourth District U.S. Representative Randy Forbes (R-Va.): It’s a resolution that Sixth District Representative Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) will introduce this week to ban earmarks in the House. Now that both the Republican and Democrat caucuses in that chamber are on record as wanting to end the pork practice, we’ll see who is serious about truly ending it.

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of Congress that House Democrats should join House Republicans in a total ban on earmarks for one year, that total discretionary spending should be reduced by the amount saved by earmark moratoriums and that a bipartisan, bicameral committee should be created to review and overhaul the budgetary, spending and earmark processes.

WHEREAS families all across our nation must make tough decisions each day about what they can and cannot afford;

WHEREAS government officials should be required to exercise an even higher standard when spending taxpayers’ hard-earned income;

WHEREAS Thomas Jefferson once wrote: “To preserve [the] independence [of the people,] we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude;

WHEREAS our national debt is at its highest rate ever;

WHEREAS the federal budget deficit is projected to exceed $1 trillion for the next two fiscal years and hover around $800 billion annually for the foreseeable future;

WHEREAS current levels of spending are simply unsustainable;

WHEREAS it is time for Congress to wake up and see that the federal deficits and the national debt have reached crisis status;

WHEREAS Congress must control spending, paving the way for a return to surpluses and ultimately paying down the national debt, rather than allow big spenders to lead us further down the road of chronic deficits and in doing so leave our children and grandchildren saddled with debt that is not their own;

WHEREAS House Republicans have adopted a one year total moratorium on all Congressional earmarks: Now therefore be it

Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that —

(1) The entire membership of the House should join House Republicans in a total ban on earmarks for one year;

(2) Discretionary spending should be reduced in the FY 2011 Budget by the total amount that was spent on requests for earmarks in FY 2010;

(3) In the event that spending in the FY 2011 Budget is not so reduced by the amount spent for earmarks in FY 2010, an amendment to the budget resolution to effectuate this change must be made in order; and

(4) A complete review and overhaul of the Congressional budgetary, spending and earmark processes should be commenced by creating a bi-partisan, bicameral committee to study the issue and report back with recommendations.

Virginia’s two U.S. Senators, Jim Webb and his junior, Mark Warner, (click to contact), despite their protestations to the contrary — and sophistry about being “raging moderates” — proved they are not “fiscal conservatives” when they voted Tuesday night against a modest reform that would have banned earmarks for one year. But when you also have voted for a half-trillion dollars in new taxes and $1 trillion in new spending in a government takeover of the health care industry, what’s several billion dollars more?

The issue was an amendment by U.S. Senator Jim Demint (R-S.C.) to ban earmarks for one year. House Republicans last week adopted a policy as a caucus that no member would offer an earmark for a year until earmark reform could be worked out. House Democrats followed suit with a vague promise of their own to ban earmarks (but who needs an earmark when you can ram through a trillion-dollar health care takeover), but I digress. The vote was 68-29 against the Demint amendment, with 15 Republicans joining all but four Democrats (see the list) to defeat it. However, it was the first time a majority of Senate Republicans supported the measure. Politico.com reports on the vote here, in an article entitled “The Senate’s proud porkers.”

So, while their political brethren in Richmond went on a fiscal diet, actually cutting spending down to 2006 levels in the recently passed Virginia budget, Senators Warner and Webb continued to pig out in Washington. Should make them a hit at the annual Virginia Pork Festival in Emporia, should they attend. But some would say the pork festival is in Washington and is an on going affair — with Virginia’s two senators among those having the most fun.

Senator Jim Demint asked Congress for a timeout on pork spending. Senators Webb and Warner, though, were having too much fun at the trough to stop.

Speaking of television ads, it wasn’t that long ago when the abortion-on-demand crowd was howling at the pro-life Super Bowl ad from Focus On The Family that featured star college football quarterback Tim Tebow and his mom. The fact that they tried to block it gave up the lie (if we needed any proof) that they are not “pro-choice” (having a baby, of course, being a choice), but rather pro-abortion at all costs.

So, what was the outcome of it all? If this was an ad promoting a secular progressive cause, the mainstream media would have produced all sorts of follow-ups, documentaries, blog posts, etc., detailing how successful it was, whether or not it really was. That it was a pro-life campaign, we didn’t expect any subsequent media, positive or otherwise. But new Focus President Jim Daly issued a letter the other day with some interesting notes about the ad’s success:

. . . the network would not permit the word “abortion” to even be mentioned. So, if we didn’t want to play by their rules, we couldn’t run the spot. … there had always been a two-part strategy surrounding the ad campaign. Our main goal was to drive viewers to FocusOnTheFamily.comwhere the full story of Mr. and Mrs. Tebow was featured. Over 1.5 million people have viewed the online movie.

. . . new research data that indicated the Super Bowl ad caused over 5 million viewers to reconsider their view of the legality/morality of abortion.

Those impressive numbers spell success. Congratulations to Focus for a good strategy and a well played hand.

It’s as if you can’t turn on the television without seeing one of those very cute Progressive Insurance Company ads. You know, the one with the borderline-nutty-clerk-who’s-kind-of-endearing who helps equally quirky people find the type of insurance they need at the lowest market price possible? Cute, huh?

What you may not know, however, is that Progressive Insurance, which ostensibly champions free enterprise, was founded — and not coincidentally named — by a big time liberal. His son, Peter Lewis (Accuracy In Media) has taken it much, much further. Not only has he been a powerful advocate for out-there causes, such as pot legalization (RightSideNews), but in recent years has partnered with his fellow billionaire buddy George Soros to fund with tens of millions of dollars (and not always ethically, see Politico), such hyper liberal groups as the ACLU, MoveOn.org and America Coming Together. (They ante upped $10 million each for ACT). In fact, they rank as the top two contributors to so-called 527 groups (Free Republic).

Of course, the whole idea of their support of these liberal groups is to get people elected who will institute government control over our lives — health care, anyone? — and tell us what to do because government knows exactly what’s best for us, right? So, if he believes top-down is best, certainly Mr. Lewis (Foundation Watch) treats his employees exceedingly well, the system works flawlessly and they love it. Well . . . as it turns out . . .  not exactly.

According to JobVent.com, Progressive rates as the worst place to work — as judged by employees themselves — and not by just a bit, either. It outranks the second worst place to work by considerable margins in several statistical categories. It seems like Mr. Lewis runs Progressive as he would his vision of government-run utopia with the same predictable results.

The Progressive Insurance Girl: You’d be a bit quirky, too, if your employer micromanaged everything you did and was bent on creating a “progressive America” as well.

Of the whopping 1,425 reviews left at JobVent.com, the leading site for employee job reviews, negative comments about Progressive outpaced the positive ones by about a 2-1 ratio. Here’s one comment from a California claims representative that has an uncanny parallel to liberalism in general and government-run health care in particular:

I felt more respected by my professors when I was in college. You can generally expect to be talked to like a 5 year old. The micromanaging is insane. The sad part is, they take good people and promote them to management where they become these scary corporate robot people. Basically, they drink A LOT of kool aid.

They cut the benefits last year and we were told in a powerpoint presentation by HR that they were cut to “align” our company with the industry standards. You can expect lots of lies, and propaganda.

Is the first part not quintessential liberalism? Patronizing, arrogant and we-know-what’s-best-for-you — and the people lording it over you are co-opted bureaucrats following the party line for the glory of state control. The second part is exactly how government-run health care will work — start you off fine, then the steady rate of rationing and, when the people inevitably speak up, we’ll be told (like we are now) it’s so much better than the old way.

Progressive’s ads are fun, but odd. Now, we know why. Apparently, it’s an accurate reflection of the company . . . on many, many levels.

So, you may have heard the Smartest President Ever yesterday (Frugal Cafe) give his latest health care takeover pep talk, or at least some sound bytes. You might not have heard this one because it doesn’t exactly flatter our president.

It’s funny how his left-wing media allies play only certain parts of the speech over and over again. I guess they think it makes him look smart . . . like when he said there were 57 states — oops! They don’t show that often, er, ever. That’s why we have YouTube. But yesterday, this mathematically challenged president said if his health care takeover plan is passed, employers could save “3,000 percent” on their health care premiums and give their employees “a raise.” Why, he thinks of it all, doesn’t he?

Ummm, let me get this straight Mr. President: Even if employers wouldn’t have to pay any health care costs, according to my private school education (don’t know about yours), that would max out to a 100 percent savings. We all know public schools are having a tough time of it, sir, but man, you’re giving private schools a bad name, too!

No wonder the bill before Congress is so bad. If it’s based on ObamaMath, can ObamaCare really do what he says it can? Not at all.

Imagine if Dan Quayle or W had said this: Late night comedic material for a month. Seriously, how well does he understand his own bill?

When the General Assembly session closed Sunday, Planned Parenthood ended up one of the session’s biggest winners. Despite efforts in the House of Delegates to deny it from benefiting financially from a “pro-choice” license plate, a conference committee recommended that it should, and the legislation easily passed both chambers Saturday. While license plates usually pass the assembly with few “no” votes, there were several members in each chamber who simply would not vote for a bill that benefited Planned Parenthood. Now this omnibus license plate bill goes to Governor Bob McDonnell for his signature, veto or amendments.

In addition, the General Assembly yesterday sent a state budget to the governor’s desk that does not prohibit taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood. It also does not include prohibitions on taxpayer funding of failed embryonic stem cell research and low-income elective abortions. All in all, a good weekend for the nation’s billion-dollar abortion behemoth.

On the license plate, according to media reports, it appears that some in the legislature were intimidated by the ACLU’s threat to sue if Planned Parenthood didn’t get the money from the plate. Courts have ruled that if one viewpoint is allowed on a license plate (i.e., “Choose Life”) than the opposite viewpoint must be allowed (in this case, “Trust Women, Respect Choice”). Courts have not, however, ruled on the issue of funding from the license plates. Nowhere in this session’s legislative process was the message of Planned Parenthood’s plate an issue — except for some members who weren’t going to vote for the plate regardless of the courts! Instead, it always, as ever with Planned Parenthood, was about the money.

Unfortunately, once the Planned Parenthood plate was attached to legislation that included several other license plates, it was going to pass. Planned Parenthood and its cronies in the legislature were willing to allow every other license plate (including one that would fund a program that helps feed children) to be defeated in order to get their way. If pro-life legislators had held out, you can imagine the headlines: Anti-abortion legislators kill funding for children.

On the other hand, the General Assembly passed its FY 2011-2012 state budget. Considering the weeping and gnashing of teeth we’ve heard for the past several months over the growing “budget deficit,” it was amazing that the legislature finished its work just one day late. According to media reports, the two-year $70 billion budget takes the state back to 2006 spending levels. While we are pleased that the budget does not include any direct tax increases on Virginia’s families, we are disappointed that simple language protecting the taxpayer from funding unethical activities was not included.

Once again, Senate Democrats such as Dick Saslaw (D-35, Springfield) and Janet Howell (D-32, Reston) were willing to put the entire commonwealth at risk by blocking a budget that included those protections. Just waiting for it to happen were headline writers and editorial page editors who would have ripped those legislators willing to stand on a pro-life principle.

But the battle isn’t over. These bills now await action by the governor. Over the next several days we will put together a comprehensive action plan for how you can make sure that your voice is heard — and heard loudly — during the veto process concerning the continued taxpayer funding of unethical activities by your state government.

Based on dialogue on the House floor this afternoon, it’s a 50-50 shot the budget will be agreed upon in time by conferees and printed for a vote tomorrow. It may go to Sunday. Even into next week. Which gives us time to renew our call for no new or additional fees or taxes.

However, according to news reports this morning, there may be some backtracking on cutting the much over bloated education spending. Of course, the VEA is making wild claims about thousands of teachers losing their jobs. It must be noted, however, that spending on K-12 education in Virginia has increased 60 percent over the last 10 years while enrollment in public schools has increased only 7.2 percent. In 2004, the General Assembly infused public education with more than a billion dollars in additional funding — remember that tax increase? — with no reforms, and every two years the antiquated funding formula guarantees one billion dollars in extra taxpayer money into public education.

Interestingly, The Family Foundation participated in a poll last year with last year with renown Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice, and found that a majority of Virginians vastly underestimate the amount of money Virginia spends per pupil on public education. While most thought it was less than $6,000, in fact it is in excess of $11,000 per student!

During the last budget process, as everyone recognized that we were in a deep economic recession, the General Assembly passed a budget based on then-Governor Tim Kaine’s projection of significant increases in revenue. Such a notion was rightly dismissed as foolish by some legislators, but a budget laden with spending based on the fictitious numbers passed anyway. Now, we’re paying the price in the form of a $4 billion deficit because even though the revenue was projected, the spending was real — Virginia’s budget is based on estimated revenue, not actual receipts. So when the real money never showed up . . .

Yet, we’re being told by some, we have to pay for their mistakes. The only one who should pay a price in this situation are those who spent the money — not those who supplied it. Tell your delegates and senators not to increase taxes and “fees” in the budget, and to cut its excessive spending to the levels of real revenue.

If you know who they are, you can get their contact info here for delegates and here for senators. If you don’t know who your delegate and senator are, click here.