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.

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.

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.

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.

Late Wednesday afternoon, amidst growing tensions on college campuses, Governor Bob McDonnell issued a “Governor’s Directive,” ordering those in the executive branch not to discriminate in their hiring practices (see here). His directive specifically referenced “sexual orientation.”

Governor McDonnell issued his directive in an apparent effort to ease the hostile atmosphere on our campuses and in the General Assembly. Four years ago, then-Attorney General McDonnell challenged Governor Tim Kaine’s executive order that added sexual orientation to the anti-discrimination policy, saying he didn’t have the authority to do so. It is still unclear exactly what legal weight, if any, a directive has, but media reports indicate that it does not have the same force of law of an executive order.

Much of the anger among college students has been generated by those who are supposed to be in authority at those schools — college presidents and administrators — who have criticized the advisory letter Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli sent them last week. The letter stated that public colleges and universities with anti-discrimination policies that include sexual orientation are in conflict with state law. Instead of providing leadership, the college presidents and administrators have provoked anger and outrage with inflamed rhetoric.

A media backlash also was fed by heated and often mean-spirited rhetoric by a handful of General Assembly members, including Senator Donald McEachin (D-9, Henrico) who, in a floor speech earlier this week, referenced Governor McDonnell’s graduate school thesis, yelling on the Senate floor, “We are being governed by the thesis!” Joining in the daily diatribes were Delegate David Englin (D-45, Alexandria) and Delegate Joe Morrissey (D-74, Henrico). It was often insinuated that anyone who disagrees with adding sexual orientation to the non-discrimination policy is hateful and bigoted. But truth has been difficult to find in this debate.

In addition, some legislators made the outrageous claim that, without a non-discrimination policy that included sexual orientation, Virginia is not “business friendly” and would not be able to attract new jobs. But several publications and organizations currently recognize Virginia as the best state in America to do business without having this policy.

Nonetheless, yesterday morning, Senator Tommy Norment (R-3, Williamsburg), in a clear conflict of interest as an employee of the College of William and Mary, one of the colleges expressing outrage over the AG’s letter, amended an economic development bill introduced by the Governor with: “The Commonwealth of Virginia maintains an ecumenical atmosphere in its sexual orientation hiring policies in the private and public workforce.”

Besides being a bizarre statement, it is a frightening overreach into the private workplace, which would include religious-based ministries and churches. Fortunately, on the floor of the Senate — because of the Governor’s directive — Senator Norment removed his amendment from the bill.

The Family Foundation has and continues to maintain that there is no need for special protections for homosexuals. As the issue was thoroughly debated and voted on multiple times throughout this year’s General Assembly, no evidence of discrimination was presented.

We absolutely agree with one statement in Governor McDonnell’s directive — that state employment should be based on “qualifications, merit and performance,” regardless of one’s immutable or unimmutable characteristics.

Over the next several days, we will consult with experts to determine the legal ramifications of this directive, but we are concerned when the Governor’s action is being heralded as a step forward by the ACLU and the state’s largest homosexual lobby, Equality Virginia (Pilot on Politics).

In a statement, Kent Willis of the ACLU said, “We hope this is only the beginning, and that the Governor’s example will inspire legislators to finally pass a law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in both private and public sector employment.”

Any thought that the groups and organizations behind this effort will stop at public employment is naive. It is very clear that they want to force private businesses — including churches — to abide by their morality.

At the beginning of this year’s General Assembly session, pregnancy resource centers were in the crosshairs of the abortion industry. From a press conference releasing a now debunked report about PRCs, to legislation that would have burdened them with unnecessary regulations, Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia must have thought they were well on their way to putting their competition out of business.

What a difference a few weeks — and the truth — makes.

Yesterday, instead of finalizing anti-PRC legislation, the House (HJ 435) and Senate (SJ 265) passed identical resolutions honoring the work of pregnancy resource centers across the commonwealth. This took place despite a frantic effort by NARAL to derail the resolutions (Washington Post Virginia Politics Blog). The resolutions were introduced at the request of The Family Foundation.

Earlier this session, the anti-PRC legislation was defeated in House and Senate sub-committees, with the Senate patron, Dr. Ralph Northam (D-6, Norfolk), actually asking for his own bill (SB 188) to be defeated. This happened in a sub-committee meeting, that he chaired, where the truth about the work of PRCs was presented through personal testimonies from young women who received support from PRCs in their time of need.

The Family Foundation was honored to work with so many great PRC directors who serve women and families in crisis each and every day. (Click here to read more about the battle in this Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star op-ed.) We especially thank Senator Jill Vogel (R-27, Winchester) and Delegate Chris Stolle, MD (R-83, Virginia Beach) for introducing these commending resolutions on behalf of Virginia’s pregnancy resource centers.

Virginia’s PRCs are grateful, too. Below is a letter we received from one center after the news the two resolutions were passed:

Thank you so much for all your work on the front lines for family values in Virginia. We continue to thank God for you all. The help and guidance that you and the FF team provided to the Virginia Directors in mid January was deeply appreciated. Weren’t we all amazed by the miraculous ways in which God moved in the Health subcommittee on January 26, 2010. I truly will never forget that day!!!!

News from the Family Foundation this morning regarding the resolutions honoring the work of PRC’s across the Commonwealth, requested by the FF and passed in both House and Senate yesterday, has truly been humbling in light of all you have already done for us. Thank you so much for your partnership in standing for life in the Commonwealth of Virginia and for the tremendous work that you do both in session season and out. May God continue to bless you all.

“And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.” Romans 8:28

This morning on Richmond’s Morning News With Jimmy Barrett on WRVA-AM, Family Foundation Vice-President for Policy and Communications Chris Freund was interviewed about the legal opinion issued by Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli and the reaction to it. It wasn’t a real debate, but immediately prior to Chris’ appearance, Barrett’s guest was Claire Guthrie Gastanaga, the lead lobbyist for Equality Virginia. Notice that she avoided Barrett’s first question and, shall we say, gave an intriguing spin on the entire matter at hand. In fact, you can detect the skepticism in Barrett’s voice and questions. Chris sets the record straight his turn at bat.

Click here to listen to the back-to-back interviews (9:24).

With President Obama urgently working on a last-gasp push to ram his government-run health care bill through Congress, and Americans — including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi — not knowing all that is contained in the 2,600 page behemoth, it is important that we all get as involved as possible to stop this monstrosity. Getting informed is the first step and tonight offers a high level source of information: Americans for Prosperity is hosting a tele-town hall meeting tonight which features U.S. Representative Mike Pence (R-Ind.). Congressman Pence is the third highest ranking Republican in the House and a leading free-market reformer. He has turned down a run for the open Indiana Senate seat this year because, some suggest, he is considering a presidential run in 2012.

Among the topics on the agenda are: The key undecided House members, the likely timeline to be used by Speaker Pelosi, and conservative alternatives along with Rep. Pence’s exchanges in recent weeks with President Obama. It starts at 8:00 p.m. Eastern and you can join in toll-free by calling (888) 356-3090 Ext.14326#.

As AFP President Tim Phillips penned in a letter to AFP members:

(Washington liberals have) put everything on the line for their ideology, as flawed as it is.

The question for us is: will we do the same for our values, our freedoms and our nation?

Speaking of getting informed, HotAir.com has a post on the latest Rasmussen Poll, which shows 57 percent of Americans oppose ObamaCare. In addition, a majority disapproves of the president’s job on the economy. One normally follows the other when you try takeover one-sixth of the economy.

The House remains in session as of this post, but earlier liberal Delegates Joe Morrissey (D-74, Henrico) and David Englin (D-45, Alexandria) railed against Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli’s recently issued opinion that states the obvious — Virginia law does not single out homosexuals as a protected class and, therefore, its colleges and universities cannot offer anti-discriminatory policies for their protection. But why is their vitriol aimed at the AG? He’s only quoting Virginia law as it reads. Delegate Adam Ebbin (D-49, Arlington), though not as vociferous as his colleagues, referenced ridicule on last night’s Daily Show, as if a flippant cable comedy show is of the heft to dictate Virginia policy.

Delegates Morrissey and Englin, however, struck a refrain that is the last resort of liberals-who-all-of-a-sudden-care-about-big-business: Virginia will lose corporate headquarters if this is allowed to stand!

Let’s see: Unemployment is at record levels (despite a $787 billion “stimulus” program by the nation’s smartest-ever-president), resulting in a lack of demand for products by consumers; we have massive, almost incomprehensible, third-world-like debt; unimaginable budget deficits projected for years; a lack of lending by banks; and, with so much liquidity in the system, the very real possibility that hyper inflation will ignite — somehow, we don’t think Fortune 500 firms are arguing over Virginia’s campus social policies. Furthermore, the delegates defeated their own arguments, citing that many of these companies have established their own policies regarding homosexuals. So why, then, would corporations be concerned about a policy concerning Virginia’s public colleges? They are not. The opinion has nothing to do with corporations.

Furthermore, if these delegates are so concerned about creating jobs and attracting corporations to Virginia, perhaps they should take real job creating action and start cutting corporate taxes, stop raising taxes on individuals and families, and cut state spending and balance our budget. But the most perplexing aspect of the entire debate is that we’ve heard nothing over the last 10 years in Virginia but that “social issues” aren’t important. Oh, really? To some, apparently, they are, and it’s very convenient for liberals, who don’t dare campaign on creating special protected classes of citizens, to criticize the attorney general simply for stating Virginia law while contriving “economic development concerns” in doing so.