Rep. Smith doubts Obama’s claim of no federal funding for abortion

News Resources Tools Columns Documents ACI Group

Contenidos del sub-menu

Comments: 5

Marjorie Dannenfelser looks on while Rep. Christopher Smith (R-N.J.) speaks at a press conference in front of the U.S. Capitol building.

Washington D.C., Sep 10, 2009 / 07:52 pm (CNA).- In comments following President Obama’s address to Congress regarding health care reform, Representative Chris Smith (R-NJ) expressed reservation about the president’s statement that under the new health care reform, “no federal dollars will be used to fund abortion.”

Smith said the president’s statement is not true by referring to Factcheck.org which notes that the current health care reform would “allow abortions to be covered by a federal plan and by federally subsidized private plans.”

“Killing human babies by abortion is not health care,” Smith stressed, remarking that “Publicly funding and facilitating abortion can in no way be construed as health care reform.”

Smith then charged President Obama of “seeking to ‘pull one over’ on the American public” by denying that the health reform won’t fund abortions. “Yet even the nonpartisan FactCheck.org has called him on this fallacious and deceptive claim,” he said.

The congressman then called for the president’s accountability. “If he intends to support the pro-life amendments that have thus far been deleted by pro-abortion members of his party, we welcome that,” said Smith. “But the truth is that he seeks to cover up his intention to use the government-run public plan to send checks from the U.S. treasury to abortionists around the country. And, use government subsidies to pay for health care plans that cover abortion.”

Following the president’s meeting Wednesday night, several pro-life leaders have questioned his assertion that “no federal dollars will be used to fund abortion.”

However, one U.S. Bishops’ Conference official told CNA on Thursday afternoon that President Obama is currently preparing a new proposal on health care reform and last night’s comments about abortion referred to this legislation.

Comments: 5

Subscriber comments:

Published by: Joan L. Roccasalvo
Bronx 09/11/2009 11:33 AM EST

It is essential that our pro-life legislators prove to the abortion advocates that funding for abortion is mandatory in the premiums that all Amercians must pay. It is sleight of hand even to suggest that abortion is not on the table. It is central to the debate for this administration.

Published by: Tony
Hastings, NE 09/11/2009 08:06 AM EST

People need to stop listening to Obama's flowery words and look at his actions - especially Catholics. He is portrayed as one who is reaching out to Catholics, but then he appoints someone to his faith based initiative team who has called the Pope a "discredited leader" and the Knights of Columbus "the footsoldiers of oppression for the discredited leaders of the Catholic Church." There are numerous times when he has said one thing but his actions have been quite different.

Published by: Tpartier
Ohio 09/11/2009 06:02 AM EST

Who cares what Chris Smith thinks about healthcare reform? I mean really, he readily acknowledges factcheck.org with respect to the potential gray areas around abortion - and they do exist, but not by deliberate intent. Contrast that with the myriad distortions that are NOT in gray areas when the question of truth is answered by factcheck and others but which are held forth by Smith and a number of other Republican "leaders", as truth about reform. You cannot lie profusely on the one hand and then claim honesty in murky waters on the other. So, which part of the Christian doctrine specifies that private entities are entitled to make grotesque fortunes off of the physical ills of others? Which part endorses the out-and-out denial of care to those who can least afford it simply because they can't? Which part suggests that it is ok to allow someone to work endlessly for the betterment of others, (such work often offers the least in pay for education required and often provides no benefits) yet allows the same good soul to writhe in pain and struggle with worries over medical bills as they fade from life as a result of catastrophic illness? Cut the two-faced chatter would ya? Your only real concern Mr. Smith is protecting, is the pockets of massive corporations - entities that have zero soul. Don't even call yourself a Christian while supporting the idea that private insurers must be allowed to exist in any form other than as adjunct, optional, providers.

Published by: Catpurrson
Spokane, WA, USA 09/11/2009 01:27 AM EST

The current Federal law already prohibits the use of taxpayer dollars to fund abortions. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING IN ANY PROPOSED LEGISLATION THAT WOULD CHANGE OR OVERRIDE THIS LAW. Stop getting your knickers in a knot!

Published by: robert matzinger
taylor/michigan/usa 09/10/2009 08:37 PM EST

Do not be deceived by Obamas claim that federal funds won't be used to fund abortions!! There is no language in Obamas current Health Care bill specifically forbidding funds to be used for abortions! And considering that Obama is an ardent abortion supporter, there is no reason to believe that Obama is telling the truth and that federal fubds (taxpayer dollars) won't be used to pay for abortions!

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
CNA does not necessarily endorse these advertisers. Please proceed with discretion. If you feel that a website announced has inappropriate or offensive content, please send it by e-mail to catholicna@catholicna.com