Search This Blog

Tuesday, July 27, 2010

No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act would protect conscience rights

Rep. Smith
The Christian Medical Association today endorsed the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act," to be introduced by my friend Rep. Chris Smith of New Jersey, which will establish a government-wide statutory prohibition on abortion funding.
This bill would make permanent the policies that currently rely on regular re-approval including: the Hyde amendment (prohibits funding for elective abortion coverage under the annual Labor, Health and Human Services Appropriations Act); the Helms amendment (prohibits funding for abortion as a method of family planning overseas); the Smith FEHBP amendment (prohibits funding for elective abortion coverage for federal employees); the Doman amendment(prohibits use of congressionally appropriated funds for abortion in the District of Columbia); other policies such as the restrictions on elective abortion funding through Peace Corp and Federal prisons.
The bill also codifies the Hyde-Weldon conscience clause that is part of the Hyde amendment. The conscience clause ensures that recipients of federal funding do not discriminate against health care providers, including doctors, nurses and hospitals, because the providers do not provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions.

Physicians can help stop human trafficking

Sec. Napolitano
On July 22, 2010, Dept. of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano launched the “Blue Campaign”—a DHS-wide initiative to combat human trafficking through enhanced public awareness, victim assistance programs, and law enforcement training and initiatives.
During a private strategy meeting with Secretary Napolitano's staff following the public launch of this program, I urged federal officials to conduct a campaign to help healthcare professionals recognize the signs of human trafficking. The Christian Medical Association, for example, has helped its membership increase awareness of human trafficking with online resources.
A study of European trafficking victims revealed that 28 percent had visited a healthcare professional during their captivity, yet none had been reported or rescued as a result. That's why it's imperative to get medical professionals on board with recognizing, reporting and aiding in the rehabilitation of trafficking victims.

Monday, July 12, 2010

Abortion advocates push taxpayer funding of military abortions

A bill that recently passed out of a U.S. Senate committee threatens to further tilt federal policy toward the administration's radically pro-abortion viewpoint. Policy experts at the Family Research Council have issued the following summary:
In the Senate Armed Service Committee Senator Roland Burris (D-Ill.) offered an amendment to strike Section 1093(b) of Title 10 of the US Code.  The amendment, which passed by a vote of 15-12, will break with current longstanding policy and permit the performance of abortions in both domestic and overseas military facilities.   Senator Ben Nelson (D-Nebr.) was the only Democrat to vote against the amendment.   A similar amendment to allow abortions in overseas military facilities was most recently offered in the House in 2006 when it failed by a vote of 191-237.  The Burris amendment is more expansive than the 2006 amendment because it allows abortion on both domestic and overseas military bases.
Current law prohibits the performance of abortion by Department of Defense medical personnel or in Department of Defense medical facilities except when the life of the mother is at risk or when the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest. There is no distinction in this policy between military facilities within the United States and those overseas.  A separate provision prohibits the use of DOD funds for abortion except to save the life of the mother.
 U.S. Code Title 10 USC Sec 1093 (In  law since 1996)                             
(a) Restriction on Use of Funds – funds available to the Department of Defense may not be used to perform abortions except where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term.
(b) Restriction on Use of Facilities – No medical treatment facility or other facility of the Department of Defense may be used to perform an abortion except where the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term or in a case in which the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest.
The Burris amendment will effectively turn our military medical facilities into abortion clinics and force American taxpayers to underwrite the use of military facilities, the procurement of additional equipment, and the use of needed military personnel to perform abortions.  In addition, when President Clinton allowed abortions in military facilities from 1993 to 1996, all military physicians (as well as many nurses and supporting personnel) refused to perform or assist in elective abortions and in response, the administration sought to hire civilians to do abortions. If the Burris amendment were enacted, not only could taxpayer funded facilities be used to support abortion on demand, but resources could also be used to search for, hire, and transport new personnel simply so that abortions could be performed. 
To speak out on this issue, call Senate offices at (202) 224-3121.