September 27th, 2017
While Congress continues to dither over fulfilling its promise to defund Planned Parenthood, President Trump is pressing forward to close the many revenue streams Obama wove into the federal tapestry during his dismal years in the White House.
In addition to Medicaid funding and Family Planning grants, Obama subsidized the abortion merchant by granting them various contracts. One such revenue stream involved hiring Planned Parenthood to help sign up people for ObamaCare. The Department of Health & Human Services has already cut those dollars by 84%. The cuts means a loss of multi-millions to Planned Parenthood.
The Trump Administration is also slashing money for sex education grants, a new program established by Obama. Cuts are expected to exceed $200 million – and one of those Planned Parenthood affiliates hardest hit is Planned Parenthood of the Greater Northwest. This is the regional operation which oversees Planned Parenthood’s operations in Idaho.
This is welcome news, but we must continue to press the fight until Planned Parenthood is completely removed from the backs of hardworking taxpayers. That requires Congressional leadership and action.
September 26th, 2017
Federal Judge Tonya Pratt issued a ruling against the State of Indiana late last week. She declared that the state’s law protecting babies with Down Syndrome from being targeted for destruction is “unconstitutional” . The Indiana law also made it illegal to abort babies solely because of disability, gender or race.
Judge Pratt struck down the law at the behest of Planned Parenthood. (And, yes, she is an Obama appointee).
This is not the first pro-abortion ruling from Pratt, but it is perhaps her most contemptible. In essence, Pratt has ruled that the U.S. Constitution protects the practice of eugenics. Most readers will be familiar with Planned Parenthood’s history of eugenics, as it was founded by Margaret Sanger, an early proponent of culling the human race on the basis of race and socio-economic background.
What may be less well known is that Pratt’s ruling has some roots in the dark judicial history of this country. There was a time when progressive jurists like Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes boldly defended the practice of forced sterilization of persons deemed “socially unfit”. See Buck v. Bell (1927). Some sources suggest that as many as 70,000 citizens were forcibly deprived of the right to reproduce.
But this ruling by Pratt actually goes further: It sanctifies the killing of an existing baby simply because of a disability or because of the baby’s gender.
One wonders when the Congress might be persuaded to intervene in the outrageous malpractice being foisted upon American society by radical judges like Ms. Pratt.
Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill announced on Tuesday that he will appeal the ruling to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, based in Chicago. In a written press release printed by LifeNews.Com, Hill says:
“By declaring unconstitutional a state law that would bar abortions solely on the basis race, sex or disability such as Down Syndrome, a federal has cleared the path for
genetic discrimination that once seemed like science fiction.”
September 23rd, 2017
It is hard to believe, but Sen. John McCain seems poised to save Planned Parenthood once again. He announced yesterday that he intended to vote against legislation that would be begin repealing ObamaCare. Included in that language is a transfer of public funds from Planned Parenthood to legitimate women’s health care providers.
There is still some hope, but time is short. Without action in the next several days, the window will close for using the reconciliation process to enact legislation with just 51 votes.
Despite the terrible abuse suffered by families in Arizona – via horrific hikes in insurance premiums – McCain remains adamant that Democrats be brought into some kind of “compromise” that will take many months to achieve. At a minimum, that means Planned Parenthood continues to receive funding for at least another year. And ObamaCare will be in place through at least 2018.
But the terms being offered by McCain are actually much worse than a year-long status quo.
So long as he serves in the Senate, McCain’s ultimatum means that ObamaCare survives in some form or another. No national Democrat can afford to defy the prevailing political reality within liberal circles by supporting a plan to destroy Obama’s legacy. Even more difficult for a Democrat would be a vote to defund Planned Parenthood.
That leaves the nation facing a pretty dark future. Perhaps one only to be corrected by the election of more Republicans to the Senate next year – which, given the current lack of meaningful accomplishment, is going to be a tough sell to the general voting public in November of 2018.
We need to be in prayer that one of the other hold-outs, perhaps Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, may change her mind on repealing ObamaCare.
There is also some hope that Senate Republicans would consider a simpler bill to defund Planned Parenthood using the reconciliation process. That doesn’t solve the crisis of the nation’s overhaul health care system, but it would be a tremendous step forward in salvaging some of the national GOP’s reputation.
September 15th, 2017
The U.S. House passed an omnibus appropriations bill (HR 3354) yesterday that consolidates into one piece of legislation all twelve of the big appropriations measures. This is a first step toward normalizing the funding process – which has been in tatters for many years.
What caught our eye about this development was the pro-Life content of the spending measure.
Buried in the section of the bill to fund the Department of Health & Human Services is language to defund Planned Parenthood. The Republican House directs that none of the money in the budget can be given to organizations that perform abortion. Instead, that money is re-directed toward actual health care providers.
In addition, the House bill would prohibit the use of federal funds in experimental research projects using tissue harvested from aborted babies.
There are dozens of other pro-Life measures written into the bill – including a prohibition of funding for the UN Population Fund and Conscience Protections for medical personnel.
That is terrific news. But it immediately raises the question: What next? Is there any chance that the U.S. Senate could pass this appropriation bill and get it to the President’s desk? We believe that this legislation is subject to the Senate’s 60-vote filibuster rule. If so, then the Democrat minority will certainly exercise its veto power and stop this bill from even being voted on.
Which brings us to the conclusion that it is time for the Senate leadership to end the filibuster rule – at least with respect to the budgeting and appropriation process. This is at the heart of the powers and Constitutional responsibilities of Congress. Yet dysfunction has become the norm. Year after year we witness the fiasco of continuing resolutions and perpetual funding of programs and agencies a majority in Congress do not support.
Recovering a rational spending process would go a long way toward rebuilding the public trust in Congress as an institution. But it will require Sen. McConnell and Senate Republicans to take the courageous step of revamping the rules best left to an era long since passed.
We pray the Republicans in the Senate find the will to pass the House appropriations measure.
September 7th, 2017
The Trump Administration must take swift action to protect religious liberty in America.
Churches in the Great State of California are being forced to pay for abortions as part of the health insurance plans they are required to provide employees. This gross assault on religious liberty rights began in 2014 when the California Department of Managed Health Care issued an edict declaring abortion to be a “basic health service”. Because of ObamaCare, that bureaucratic edict has the force of law.
And now a federal district court in California has apparently issued a ruling declaring that this ObamaCare rule wipes out the First Amendment to the Constitution.
Several churches in California filed a lawsuit against the State of California begging for relief from the courts. They argued that not only does the California rule violate the right to the free exercise of religion, it also violates federal law in the form of the Weldon Amendment designed to prevent the use of federal tax dollars to pay for abortions.
The federal judge dismissed the lawsuit brought by three churches last week, relying upon a ruling by the Obama Administration’s Justice Department that California’s mandate does not violate the Weldon Amendment.
Pro-Life members of Congress have already been working on the Trump Administration to fix this situation. According to LifeNews, a delegation recently met with Health & Human Services Secretary Tom Price, asking for a fresh review of the outrage in California and the application of the Weldon Amendment to policies sold in California.
It is difficult to understand how a federal judge is free to ignore the clear language of the Constitution, or the various Supreme Court rulings applying the First Amendment to this whole ObamaCare/Abortion Mandate controversy.
Ultimately, it is up to the Congress to destroy the monster which is ObamaCare. Let us pray that, after yet another vacation, Republicans in Congress return to work with a fresh sense of vigor to provide the leadership and relief they have promised.
August 30th, 2017
By David Ripley
Idaho Democrats and media folks will be making much this week of Cecil Andrus, the recently deceased former governor of Idaho. And, honestly, there is much about Andrus’ career which is very noteworthy. There is no doubt, for instance, that he is one of the state’s most effective politicians. With his time as Interior Secretary (under Jimmy Carter), Andrus became one of Idaho’s most prominent national exports, ranking with the likes of William Borah and Frank Church as a player on a national stage.
He worked hard to move Idaho in a leftward trajectory during his second stint as governor, and Democrats are, as one would expect, lauding his work at improving education funding and expanding public lands.
We note, however, that the many obituaries and tributes proffered to date fail to mention his most significant historical moment: As the entire nation watched, Cecil Andrus vetoed HB 625 following the 1990 Session of the Idaho Legislature. This bill would have severely restricted the practice of abortion in Idaho. As a pro-abortion Democrat consultant in those days, I was among those urging his veto of the bill. And I was present in his office at the moment he stamped his veto on the bill; much to my shame, I joined with those cheering his action.
Prior to that moment, Andrus had always campaigned as “pro-Life” and something of a moderate. And in that he was not alone. Most Idaho Democrats holding elective office in the immediate post-Roe era identified as “pro-Life”.
But as the lives of thousands of preborn hung in the balance, Andrus chose to defend abortion-on-demand. He then persuaded most Democrats in Idaho to abandon their historical position to eventually become the party of abortion rights. Andrus and Idaho Democrats enjoyed some initial political success with their new “progressive” strategy.
Over the decades since, however, Idaho Democrats began to swallow more and more of the radical social agenda on marriage, homosexuality, abortion and transgenderism. They began to abandon the public argument that they were different from more radical national Democrats, and, today, make little pretense of seeking to represent the values or opinions of the Idahoans they seek to “represent” in office. I believe this alienation is the key failing of the modern Idaho Democrat Party, and central to the reason they hold so few seats in the Legislature.
This transformation was exemplified by Cecil Andrus himself when he heartily endorsed Barack Obama for president.
So, for all his brilliance and skill as a national-grade politician, Cecil Andrus can be rightly charged with leading his Idaho Democrats into a political cul-de-sac. But that is just more politics.
I write this with a heavy heart – not so much for the loss of Cecil Andrus, who enjoyed a long and richly blessed life. No. My heart is heavy in realizing that many thousands of Idaho babies have been lost, many women and men damaged, as a result of that seminal decision by Andrus back in the spring of 1990. My own preborn son is among those casualties.
Perhaps Andrus’ most enduring legacy will be the fact that in the Idaho Statehouse today, Democrats continue to follow his lead by fighting any attempt to restrict their most cherished civic value, abortion-on-demand, at any stage of a pregnancy.
August 19th, 2017
The liberals in Oregon have struck another death blow at the innocent by essentially declaring “free” abortions a right in this west coast enclave. (We say “free” because the women and babies and fathers and families and taxpayers will pay a heavy emotional, financial and spiritual cost).
Under the legislation signed into law by Governor Kate Brown this week, any resident of Oregon – whether legal or illegal – can get the taxpayers of that state to cover the cost of their abortions. Insurance companies are also forced to provide elective abortion services as part of their “essential” benefit package to all policy holders. And they are forbidden to charge a co-pay or deductible.
This is a financial bonanza for Planned Parenthood, of course.
But it is also a distressing development on many levels. It will guarantee an increased rate of killings of preborn children. It also embroils every employer, taxpayer and insurance company in the morally repugnant act of destroying innocent lives.
In his fight against the legislation, Oregon state Representative Mike Nearman made it clear that Oregon has no meaningful restriction on the so-called “right” to abortion. He declared that one could get an abortion at any time in a pregnancy, and for any reason. And, now, that service is cost free to the mother.
In their zeal to enhance Planned Parenthood’s coffers, Oregon Democrats may have jeopardized health care for many Oregonians. Some legal analysts believe that the new law violates the provisions of the federal Weldon Amendment, which prohibits the use of federal taxpayers to pay for abortions.
One can only hope and pray that the Trump Administration will scrutinize the radical policies now in place in Oregon.
August 13th, 2017
Despite being gone from office for some seven months, the Obama Administration continues to impose its will on the people of America.
With the failure of the Republican Senate to move on repealing ObamaCare and all its ugly mandates, the federal government continues to force Christians to pay for abortion-causing drugs as part of ObamaCare insurance plans.
The latest setback came from the hands of the Third Circuit of Appeals, housed in Pennsylvania, which ruled last week that a pro-Life pregnancy center in Pennsylvania was not exempt from the ObamaCare Mandate which forces them to purchase insurance for employees covering abortion-causing drugs. Two of the three judges on the panel issued a ruling declaring that Real Alternatives was “in no way like a religious denomination or one of its nontheistic counterparts” – and, therefore, is not protected by the Supreme Court’s rulings in the Hobby Lobby or Little Sisters cases.
The pro-Life pregnancy center is, therefore, required to use its funds, donated by Christians to save babies from abortion, to help pay for aborting babies: An unbelievable abuse of governmental authority.
In a statement to Life News, the director of the pregnancy center, Kevin Bagatta, argued with the edict by the 3rd Circuit panel, comparing its decision to one in which the American Cancer Society was forced to purchase cartons of cigarettes for its employees. Obviously the Left would tolerate no such thing.
One would assume that the pregnancy center will ask the Supreme Court to look at the 3rd Circuit ruling. But even a victory there is not sufficient. As long as Congress refuses to destroy this ObamaCare thing, various rebellious courts and rogue agents in the Justice Department will continue to use its provisions to harass and obstruct the pro-Life agenda. They will continue to defy previous Supreme Court rulings. And they will continue to twist and dismiss the liberty protections guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
We must also observe that it is nearly inexplicable that the Trump Administration has allowed federal government employees to continue to defend the ObamaCare Mandate in the courts. Why did Attorney General Sessions not order the attorneys working for the federal government to stand down in the case against Real Alternatives? Part of the answer, no doubt, is that the vast apparatus of the U.S. Department of Justice is not really under the control of Trump or Sessions. This huge legal machinery is staffed with liberal Democrats left behind like roadside bombs by Barack Obama.
Which brings us back to the very slow pace of work being accomplished by the U.S. Senate.
The ruling by the 3rd Circuit illustrates just one of the most egregious aspects of genuine oppression being suffered by the American people as a result of Congress’ failure to act. (Need we mention the huge rate increase being imposed on Idahoans next year by Blue Cross?)
Hopefully members of Congress will be getting an awful earful during their August vacation.
July 28th, 2017
News has just reached us that baby Charlie Gard has passed away.
He was denied access to experimental care by a European government gone amuck and a medical/legal system more interested in control than serving mankind. The arrogance of the British court system reached new heights when a London judge even denied Charlie’s parents the dignity of bringing their baby home to die in the privacy of their family.
We believe that Charlie is in a better place. We pray for the comfort of his loving parents. And we can only hope that his death will force a more fierce debate about the dangerous direction in which health care is headed.
Such a debate is now more important than ever given Sen. John McCain’s decision to single-handedly protect and preserve ObamaCare in the United States.
July 22nd, 2017
The on-going battle for the life of baby Charlie Gard in England has taken another dark turn. The judge there issued a ruling that the baby’s parents could not take him to the United States for experimental treatment without his permission. Ponder that for a moment.
There might be an argument for a court to get involved in such a case if there is a conflict between responsible family members. Or if there is evidence of neglect. Perhaps one could argue that courts ought to get involved when medical staff don’t feel continued treatment is humane or even reasonable.
But how can one justify the court’s imperious position in this circumstance?
While the medical staff in England have concluded that the baby should be taken off life support, an American doctor has stepped forward and is offering to treat baby Charlie. Why would the medical staff or a court stand in the way? What interests could compel a judge to override the parents’ desire to pursue treatment? After all, they have raised private funds to pay for treatment, so this judge can’t even offer the excuse of representing the taxpayers in socialist England.
The most likely motivation is imperious arrogance.
Given the corruption of England’s health care system by overwhelming governmental intrusion, health care decisions are now a matter of societal concern. Government and its various demi-gods shall be in charge. No longer shall individuals be allowed to make choices for themselves or their loved ones. Families cannot be allowed to struggle through the hard choices inherent in the treatment of deadly diseases. Now lawyers and bureaucrats and prideful medical professionals shall decide who lives and who dies; who is worth saving at what cost.
For those seduced by the Bernie Sanders-Nancy Pelosi scheme to enlarge government intrusion into American health care – we urge a cold-eye review of this tragedy in England. This is where we are headed in this nation: A world in which the primary struggle is not against the disease or injury, but against one’s own government.
Subscribe to Idaho Chooses Life commentaries.
2010-2012 Archive by Category