Recently in Congress Category

Barry, we don't get a lot of calls about Halloween.  Over the years, it's not something we hear much about.  And this year is no exception.  What we are hearing about from a lot of folks, though, is the continued frustration and concern about the use of taxpayer dollars to fund organizations like Planned Parenthood - the nation's largest abortion provider.

A recent example is what's taking place in Ohio where a local government body approved a $50,000 grant to Planned Parenthood to provide 'sex education' in public schools.  

At the national level, as Planned Parenthood continues to receive hundreds of millions of federal taxpayer dollars each year, debate is intensifying over whether the organization should receive ANY federal funds in the future.  In Congress, Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana has introduced H.R. 614 which would prohibit federal dollars from going to Planned Parenthood.

Ok, Barry - looks like we won't agree on the Ten Commandments and what we consider to be the proper and constitutional displays present in Judge DeWeese's courtroom.

Let's try this one. 

A federal district court in New Hampshire has issued a decision upholding the voluntary recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance by students in school and has dismissed a lawsuit filed by the Freedom From Religion Foundation.

The suit was filed in 2007 against two New Hampshire public school districts and Congress on behalf of several parents and students who objected to the voluntary recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance in school.  Specifically, the lawsuit challenged the addition of the words "under God" in 1954 in the Pledge and the practice of reciting the Pledge in public schools as a patriotic exercise.

The bill  introduced to reform health care by Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) has splintered the Democrats and so far has no support among Republicans.  As reported earlier, Senators Grassley and Enzi, in fact, have expressed concerns about the abortion provisions. 

Based on our initial reading, we too have concerns with the abortion provisions in this bill.

First, with regards to a minimum benefits package, p. 25 of the bill states that abortion "cannot be a mandated benefit as part of a minimum benefits package except in those cases for which Federal funds appropriated for the Department of Health and Human Services are permitted."  We are concerned that, if the Hyde Amendment is scrapped by the pro-abortion Congress, then abortion on demand could be mandated as a minimum benefit.  Since 1976, the Hyde Amendment has been added each year to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) appropriations bill.  The amendment prevents federal funding of abortion, except in limited circumstances.  However, Congress could, at some point, fail to add the Hyde Amendment to the HHS appropriations bill, thus eliminating its protections.

Barry, even as another health care plan is being introduced into Congress, there's a continuing - and a very real - concern about the issue of abortion.

Senators Michael Enzi of Wyoming and Charles Grassley of Iowa have expressed their concern to Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus who is offering his own health care measure.  Senators Enzi and Grassley are correctly concerned about the lack of language in the bill.

According to the New York Times report:

Mr. Enzi and Mr. Grassley also told Mr. Baucus that health legislation must include language affirmatively prohibiting the use of federal money to pay for abortion. The restriction, they said, should apply to any subsidies that help low-income people buy insurance. In addition, they said, health plans should not be obliged to provide abortion. Thus, they said, the bill should "include a conscience clause to protect entities from being required to contract with abortion providers."

Barry, unfortunately President Obama squandered a prime-time audience and a Congressional address to do very little to move the ball forward regarding efforts to reform our health care system. 

President Obama is losing support with the American people on this issue.  And, after his address I can see why.

In fact, I would argue that the President drew more lines in the sand - dividing Americans - especially pro-life Americans who don't want abortion services mandated as part of some kind of health care 'benefit.'