Abortion ‘absolutists’ blocking bill to support pregnant women, pro-life Dem says
Imprimir Incrementar tamaño de fuente Disminuir tamaño de fuente

The U.S. House of Representatives

.- Kristen Day, executive director of Democrats for Life of America, has criticized the lack of support among the more “absolutist” Democratic supporters of abortion rights for a bill that aims to reduce the number of abortions by helping pregnant women. Day claimed the bill’s opponents think the bill “goes too far toward common ground.”

Day authored a May 22 essay in Newsday, titled “Is there a middle on abortion?”, explaining the provisions of the Pregnant Women Support Act (PWSA) and the proposed legislation’s political reception.

A “minority of Democrats on the pro-choice side” object to a provision requiring that abortion providers offer women the voluntary option of receiving pre-abortion counseling to learn of the risks associated with abortion, Day said.

“The opposition may even extend to objecting to the bill's providing pregnant women much-needed financial support,” Day wrote in her Newsday.com essay.

Describing the PWSA, Day said the bill would lead to fewer abortions and provide more support for women to carry their pregnancies to term.

The proposal would prohibit health insurance issuers from discriminating against a woman by classifying a pregnancy as a pre-existing condition. It would allocate more funds to campaigns against domestic violence targeting pregnant women, some of whom are “forced to undergo abortions” because of threats by the violent father of their child, she explained.

The bill would provide grants to colleges and universities for pregnant and parenting student services to help women and mothers finish school. Additionally, PWSA would increase support for food stamps for new parents and amend the tax code to increase the adoption tax credit.

Day reported that opponents’ biggest objection to PWSA was that “pregnancy-prevention measures” such as family planning services for the poor and “medically accurate” sex education programs about contraception are not funded by the bill.

She said that sponsors left such proposals out of the PWSA because they are addressed in bills such as the Prevention First Act.

Despite opposition from “absolutists” on the side of abortion rights, Day said that many are attracted to the legislation and want to expand it. However, she explained that efforts to merge teen pregnancy prevention, sex education and more funding for contraception programs failed in the 110th Congress and “detracted from the central premise” the PWSA, which Day characterized as “a comprehensive effort to address the needs of pregnant women.”

In a Monday phone interview, CNA asked Day to expand on her comments about pro-choice “absolutists” who think the PWSA goes too far towards common ground.

“A lot of people don’t want the abortion debate to be settled because it keeps people in business,” she said. “To actually solve this great problem, people don’t want to move in that direction. Or they want an ‘all-or-nothing’ approach. Some people just want to ban abortions, but don’t work towards reducing it.”

“It’s the same on the other side. Any compromise goes too far.”

Day told CNA that to her knowledge President Obama has not personally been asked to support the PWSA.

“We’re talking to the administration on a regular basis and whenever we do we bring it up,” she explained. “We’re very hopeful that we can get the support of the White House. The indications are moving that way.”

She cited President Obama’s comments at Notre Dame about more support for pregnant women as one such indication.

Asked about Congressional leaders’ views of PWSA, Day explained that DFLA had been talking to Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office and Senate Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid’s office. She told CNA there were “good indications” from them.

“They’re looking into the bill,” she reported, noting that in the last Congress, House Majority Whip Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC) was a co-sponsor of the bill.

PWSA supporters were concentrating on building “bipartisan support” in the House especially, Day said.

“If you simply have a Democratic bill with only pro-choice Democrats on board, that’s not common ground,” Day said. “What we’ve built here is really a common ground proposal.”

“If we are serious about reducing abortion and helping actually end it we have to step in and look at the value of life,” she continued, saying the bill took into account measures which have successfully reduced the number of abortions.

Day told CNA that one part of the bill would help direct women to a 1-800 number to secure assistance. A similar program in Michigan helped reduce the abortion rate by 11 percent, she reported.

“The lower numbers we have, the better. Even if we cut the abortion rate in half, that is a lot of lives we're saving.

“If we are serious about most vulnerable, we need to use money to do it.” she said, then posing the question: “What is the value of life?”

Imprimir Incrementar tamaño de fuente Disminuir tamaño de fuente
Subscriber comments:
Published by: Dan
Santa Fe/NM/US 06/02/2009 09:26 PM EST
There's a Pro-Life Dem?
Published by: K.
KY, USA 06/02/2009 07:37 PM EST
Is there a list of the legislators currently opposing the bill?
Published by: nancy
Arizona 06/02/2009 04:45 PM EST
I applaud this type of forward thinking legislation that addresses the problems women have in making a truly well-thought-out choice. Women are entitled to be told all the facts, to see clear ultrasound pictures of their children, to know the risks to their reproductive organs, including possible increase breast cancer risk equivilent to the increased risk of women suffering a miscarriage, and to have help against coersion, and to be able to continue their education.
Published by: T. Arden
SF, CA 06/02/2009 03:33 PM EST
A “minority of Democrats on the pro-choice side” - Let me guess, Pelosi, Boxer, Feinstein, and most if not all of the female representatives of Congress.
Truly the party of death.
Published by: Raymond Peringer
Toronto, Canada 06/02/2009 03:09 PM EST
If pro-death Democrats won't object to gender-selective abortions, it is no surprise they object to any support for pregnant women.

Honest pro-choice means would-be mothers are told all the facts, including available social and financial support.

These people are really against population increase of any kind, despite the fact that the world population will soon be in decline.

Most European nations are already in population decline. Their door is open to foreign take-over.
Published by: Patrick
Boardman/OH/USA 06/02/2009 02:24 PM EST
Excellent! Not perfect, but a great step toward positive action rather than moralizing rhetoric. When it is accepted that an all or nothing position will not work, practical steps such as this will start to make sense. When pro-birth, which is what pro-life is disguised as, comes around to supporting life outside the womb after birth, i.e. all the little necessities of caring for a child that poor mothers lack, maybe things will slowly start to change. Condemnation and rock-throwing will not work. Jesus taught us that. Love and a helping hand may do wonders.
Published by: d.smith
calif. 06/02/2009 02:04 PM EST
Isn't it a shame that those millions that go for murdering babies in this country and others, can't be used instead to give mothers the help, through the first year or so of parenthood.

Would that we had a president and legislators that had some integrity and moral sense to recognize that!

God will not tolerate this infanticide - this genocide; pre-selection, or any form of murder. Remember: "Thou shall not kill?"

God is pro-life.
Published by: Jim Blazsik
Toledo, OH 06/02/2009 12:49 PM EST
My concern is the impact of increasing single parent families.

Will a women get pregnant so that she can receive assistance?
Published by: Radomysl Twardowski
Bismarck, ND, USA 06/02/2009 12:15 PM EST
Democrats are just too deep into the abortion culture. I think that those Catholics and Dems who want to be pro-life, simply switch to the Republicans.
ADD A COMMENT (Your e-mail will NOT be published):
NAME:
CITY/STATE/COUNTRY:
EMAIL:
COMMENT:
 
PLEASE ENTER THE SECURITY CODE DISPLAYED ABOVE:
Chars:
* Thanks for your comments. The number of messages that can be online is limited. Length should not exceed 1500 characters. CNA reserves the right to edit messages for content and tone. Comments and opinions expressed by users do not necessarily reflect the opinions or beliefs of CNA. CNA will not publish comments with abusive language, insults or links to other pages.
ADVERTISING
Place your ad here
Resources:
Columns:
News:
Documents:
Tools:
ACI Group:
ACI Prensa