To read news coverage of the anti-insurance bill that Republicans passed instead of a 20-week ban on abortion, you’d think the new bill is no big deal. In reality, though, it’s just as bad in most ways.
“It seems that the majority has an endless supply of bills attacking women’s health. Can’t pass this one? Grab another,” said Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY) on the House floor.
Concerned about a possible female GOP “revolt” over a 20-week abortion ban, Republicans will pinch-hit with another bill from their deep bench of anti-choice legislation—a bill to restrict federal funding for abortion coverage.
There’s a growing conflict between states that recognize a fundamental right to make end-of-life decisions and those that override those wishes only when a person is pregnant.
“It’s just a fake front issue to talk about abortion,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said of HR 7, the anti-choice bill passed just hours before Tuesday’s State of the Union address. “What they’re really talking about is contraception, family planning, the judgment of women.”
Let’s go behind the statistics—behind the political rhetoric—to talk about the real impact of restrictions on abortion and bans on coverage.
Speaking in the Rules Committee, Rep. Alcee Hastings said, “I think men ought to butt out of this subject, and be about the business of respecting women and their rights.”
At the annual protest against the Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade, anti-choice activists got a blessing from Pope Francis and a promise from the House majority leader.
The Roberts Court may be skeptical of buffer zones around abortion clinics, but the rest of the country doesn’t seem to be.
The bill marked up today has next to no chance of passing the Senate in this session, but that doesn’t mean House passage poses no threat.