• ariel-dougherty

       Why is Rep. Franks (AZ) even trying to write laws that effect DC alone?  Home rule or the lack of it is the reason.  The District of Columbia is run by the US Congress and does not have full home rule, allowing them to write their own laws.  Rather paternalistic, no?   Yes!  There is a LONG history of this abuse by ideological Congressmen using the District as their “test case” for various issues.  It’s insulting and is certainly a violation of a core principle of the US Constitution about representative government.  Hey, Mr. Franks those living in DC didn’t elect you.  And last, let Congresswoman Norton speak.  She was elected by DC residents!

  • oak-cliff-townie

    I think it is preemptive damage control on their part I guess the reasoning is RUSH can’t call her names if she isn’t allowed to speak ?

    Remember how well that turned out for them. And him …

    And the worst part of that was Rush being Rush Stole the Spotlight from the committee who hosted the woman in the first place.

    This is so bleeping High school it is hard to make sense of it .



  • coralsea

    All I can think is that these losers are scared to death of women and believe they must be subjugated by whatever means necessary.

  • noworsethanusual

    Here is what the National Right to Life organization posted on its Facebook page, regarding  this flap:


    News flash: The Democrats on the House Judiciary Constitution Subcommittee had a discretionary witness slot for the May 17 hearing on H.R. 3803, the bill to prohibit abortion of pain-capable unborn children, after 20 weeks, in the District. The Democrats could have used that slot to invite Norton, or to invite any other person they chose to discuss the implications of the bill for “D.C. autonomy,” if they really thought that “D.C. autonomy” was the primary issue raised by this bill. But instead, the Democrats invited a woman who had a late abortion. Apparently, then, the Democrats in Congress who are really calling the shots — or the pro-abortion activist lobbyists who advise them what shots to call — think that this bill and this hearing are, first and foremost, about late abortions, not about “D.C. autonomy.” And we agree.

    To say it more bluntly: The Democrats decided Norton would not be their strongest witness — and then they put it out that the Republicans had “excluded” her. Another phony manufactured story for the blogosphere.

    We have found that many lawmakers are shocked to learn that in the nation’s capital, abortion is legal for any reason, to the moment of birth. Lawmakers who find this policy indefensible will be well advised to support this bill, because Article I of the Constitution makes it perfectly clear that the responsibility for the policy rests solely on them — and on the President. Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution provides that Congress shall “exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District…”

    I noticed that Norton’s press release again employed one of her favorite phrases, “bullying tactics.” In my book, abortionists are the ultimate bullies — they pull the arms and legs off babies who are a lot smaller than they are:

    Norton’s press release also repeats a misrepresentation that she has made before, asserting that the bill “targets… women who live in the District of Columbia…” Actually, the bill contains no reference whatever to residency. It applies to acts conducted within the District, a federal jurisdiction. Under the bill, it makes no difference whether a woman seeking an abortion after 20 weeks, or the abortionist, “live in the District of Columbia.” However, it may be of interest to note that what data there is, while sketchy, suggests that the majority of abortions performed in the District are performed on non-residents.

    Douglas Johnson
    Legislative Director
    National Right to Life Committee (NRLC).
    Washington, D.C. 20004
    federallegislation // at // nrlc, dot, org.


  • jennifer-starr

    Sounds more like the NRLC is doing PR/damage control to me–they were caught with egg on their face and now they have to find a way to ‘spin’ this. And it still fails to explain why someone who lives way over in Arizona should have anything to do with legislating to women who live in the DC area. Make no mistake–Franks is doing this to gain publicity for himself–it has nothing at all to do with ‘the baybees’.  

Mobile Theme