Eight Senate Democrats Flip, Kill Parental Notification Bill

[urban-hermit]

Not enough Senators were willing to fight for parents to be notified before their under-age daughters have abortions. Very disappointing.

nrlc.org/Federal/CCPA/Release093006.html

Still we have to press on and know that Life WILL prevail and that we can help that happen sooner rather than later.

 

[leonie]

Evan Bayh. He’s a disgrace to Indiana.

He said he’d keep his conservative values in the Senate. Yeah right. As soon as he was elected, he started selling out to the party. Ambition is a poison.

Looks like I have some letters to write.

 

[rlg94086]

Please keep this filibuster in mind next time someone tells you the Republicans aren’t doing anything on pro-life issues. How, exactly, are they supposed to overcome Democrat filibusters?

We need more pro-life politicians in both parties! Obviously, at least 60 in the Senate, so we can pass real pro-life legislation.

 

[mary_bobo]

Evan Bayh. He’s a disgrace to Indiana.

He said he’d keep his conservative values in the Senate. Yeah right. As soon as he was elected, he started selling out to the party. Ambition is a poison.

Looks like I have some letters to write.

Good idea, but do you think Bayh, or any of them for that matter, give a rat’s nose what their constituents think? Sadly, I don’t.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Please keep this filibuster in mind next time someone tells you the Republicans aren’t doing anything on pro-life issues. How, exactly, are they supposed to overcome Democrat filibusters?

We need more pro-life politicians in both parties! Obviously, at least 60 in the Senate, so we can pass real pro-life legislation.

What fillibuster? All the Democrats have to do is say they are going to fillibuster and the Republicans cave in. Why don’t they let them fillibuster. See how many are still going strong after the first month or two and they have missed a couple of vacations. Why did they recess? A fillibuster through the election would have been a good idea.

 

[rlg94086]

What fillibuster? All the Democrats have to do is say they are going to fillibuster and the Republicans cave in. Why don’t they let them fillibuster. See how many are still going strong after the first month or two and they have missed a couple of vacations. Why did they recess? A fillibuster through the election would have been a good idea.

Sorry, I thought it was a filibuster, because they had to vote for cloture - apparently, it was some other procedural tactic…

**The cloture motion was supported by 51 of the chamber’s 55 Republicans (93%), but by only six of the 45 members of the Democratic caucus (13%). The complete roll call can be viewed **here.

The bill, S. 403, the Child Custody Protection Act, as it initially passed the Senate on July 25 by a vote of 65-34, would have prohibited transporting a minor across state lines to obtain an abortion, if this abridged the parents’ right to be notified under the home-state law. However, the Senate Democratic leadership subsequently raised unusual procedural barriers that prevented the bill from going to a House-Senate conference committee. On September 26, the House took up the Senate-passed bill, added a provision to require an abortionist in any state to notify one parent before performing an abortion on a minor from another state (with certain exceptions), and sent the bill back to the Senate by a vote of 264-153 (under the title “Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act,” or CIANA). It was this amended bill that the Senate voted on last night.

Of the 14 Democrats who initially voted in favor of S. 403 on July 25, yesterday eight flipped and voted to kill the parental notification requirement: Ken Salazar (Co.), Tom Carper (De.), Bill Nelson (Fl.), Daniel Inouye (Hi.), Evan Bayh (In.), Kent Conrad and Byron Dorgan (both ND), and Herb Kohl (Wi).

Bottomline though is that the legislation past, but was then held up by the Democrats.

 

[John_Higgins]

Why don’t all you Republicans and Republican fans put the focus on where it should be? If just three of the four Republicans who voted no had voted yes, the bill would have gotten through.

John

 

[urban-hermit]

Why don’t all you Republicans and Republican fans put the focus on where it should be? If just three of the four Republicans who voted no had voted yes, the bill would have gotten through.

Hi John - I noticed that too and I, as a republican, want to say I am deeply disappointed with those few republicans who could have made this protective legislation happen but did not.

I also want to say that if there were more pro-Life democrats, and if the party platform and party as a whole were committed to protecting unborn Americans from the assassination which is abortion, I would be thrilled. I would even vote democrat in any race where the democratic candidate was more pro-Life than the republican one, taking into account all the life issues.

But as it is, it is not only the fact that there are precious few Democrats who are pro-Life (although their small number does seem to be growing), the problem is that the PARTY is anti-Life: Look at this particular bill. EIGHT democrats who voted FOR this life-saving legislation, and helped get it passed FLIP-FLOPPED when it came time for them to stand by their conscience and send the approved bill on to be put into law. WHY? Because their PARTY wanted to stop the bill.

 

[rlg94086]

Why don’t all you Republicans and Republican fans put the focus on where it should be? If just three of the four Republicans who voted no had voted yes, the bill would have gotten through.

John

John,

In my first response, I made a call for more pro-life politicians. I didn’t specify Democrat or Republican.

To amend your statement, if just three more Senators had voted yes, the bill would have gotten through. Why do you want to focus on the three Republicans? There are pro-choice politicians in both parties.

God bless,

Robert

 

[mary_bobo]

Hi John - I noticed that too and I, as a republican, want to say I am deeply disappointed with those few republicans who could have made this protective legislation happen but did not.

I also want to say that if there were more pro-Life democrats, and if the party platform and party as a whole were committed to protecting unborn Americans from the assassination which is abortion, I would be thrilled. I would even vote democrat in any race where the democratic candidate was more pro-Life than the republican one, taking into account all the life issues.

But as it is, it is not only the fact that there are precious few Democrats who are pro-Life (although their small number does seem to be growing), the problem is that the PARTY is anti-Life: Look at this particular bill. EIGHT democrats who voted FOR this life-saving legislation, and helped get it passed FLIP-FLOPPED when it came time for them to stand by their conscience and send the approved bill on to be put into law. WHY? Because their PARTY wanted to stop the bill.

Now they can go back to their constituents and say they voted for it before they voted against it.

 

[KathleenElsie]

What filibuster? All the Democrats have to do is say they are going to filibuster and the Republicans cave in. Why don’t they let them filibuster. See how many are still going strong after the first month or two and they have missed a couple of vacations. Why did they recess? A filibuster through the election would have been a good idea.

It might have been. Then none of the politicians would have been able to go home to run for election.

The other end of this situation is that nothing else can get done, budget, security, education, medical and the list goes on and on.

The filibuster is the democrats form of blackmail.

 

[estesbob]

Next time someone tells you the party affiliation of who you vote for doesnt matter just remember this.

 

[Scottgun]

Nah that is a good point. I’ve always voted Republican, but it seems they are more and more sliding into the consequentialist heresy.

Scott

 

[estesbob]

Why don’t all you Republicans and Republican fans put the focus on where it should be? If just three of the four Republicans who voted no had voted yes, the bill would have gotten through.

John

The focus is where it should be-39 Democrats voted to filibuster-4 republicans did-how you can spin this as the fault of the republican Party is beyond me. But then how anyone can claim to be pro-life and vote for the party of death is beyond me.

 

[milimac]

Why don’t all you Republicans and Republican fans put the focus on where it should be? If just three of the four Republicans who voted no had voted yes, the bill would have gotten through.

John

If just 3 of the 8 Democrats who ALREADY voted “yes” would’ve had any integrity and voted “yes” again, it would’ve passed. I guess trusting their integrity was a dumb expectation. The Democratic party, with a small peppering of exceptions, is truly the party of death.

 

[Dandelion_Wine]

Why don’t all you Republicans and Republican fans put the focus on where it should be? If just three of the four Republicans who voted no had voted yes, the bill would have gotten through.

I’m with John on this one. There’s all this rhetoric on this forum (see some below - just from this thread) about Republicans being pro-life and Democrats pro-death. If those Republicans would’ve voted pro-life, we wouldn’t have to blame the Democrats now would we?

The filibuster is the democrats form of blackmail.

Next time someone tells you the party affiliation of who you vote for doesnt matter just remember this.

But then how anyone can claim to be pro-life and vote for the party of death is beyond me.

The Democratic party, with a small peppering of exceptions, is truly the party of death.

 

[rlg94086]

I’m with John on this one. There’s all this rhetoric on this forum (see some below - just from this thread) about Republicans being pro-life and Democrats pro-death. If those Republicans would’ve voted pro-life, we wouldn’t have to blame the Democrats now would we?

What a silly statement. If Democrats voted pro-life, we wouldn’t have to blame anyone…

The reality Dandelion_Wine is that neither party is a monolithic group. While there are far more pro-life Republicans than Democrats, there are not enough to get everything passed that we would like. These days a majority isn’t enough, you need a super-majority to overcome filibusters by the pro-choice politicos.

Bottomline - we need more pro-life congressman and senators in whatever party we can get them elected, a pro-life president to sign the bills when they get there, and good judges on the SCOTUS to prevent the twisting of the Constitution that has allowed abortion. That is a tall order.

 

[Digitonomy]

The difference between the first and second bill isn’t that significant for the average person - the amended version requires the abortionist to notify the parent, while the original simply made it a crime for anyone to transport a minor out of state in order to avoid parental notification laws. However, it’s very significant for the abortionist. The extra burden on the physician performing the abortion may have caused lobbyists for doctors to pressure against the amended version.

Also, in the NLRC article linked, it sounds like the abortionist is required to do this regardless of what the law is in the original state, whereas the original appears to criminalize the behavior only if there is a parental notification law in the girl’s home state.

 

[milimac]

I’m with John on this one. There’s all this rhetoric on this forum (see some below - just from this thread) about Republicans being pro-life and Democrats pro-death. If those Republicans would’ve voted pro-life, we wouldn’t have to blame the Democrats now would we?

So are you saying that the problem lies completely or at least mostly with the Republicans because they couldn’t get every congressman of their party to vote for the legislation? It’s been stated elsewhere that those few Republicans who voted down the legislation are also responsible, but the tone of your response suggests the blame is more towards the Republican party? Or are you saying we should only evaluate the congressman of our own party, even if a member of another party is representing us? Sorry, but they’re ALL held accountable. Or are you a Democrat and defensive because your party’s voting record is so clearly on the side of the culture of death? Or were you actually against the legislation and feel that a parent has no right to know if their daughter is about to abort her baby?

Please explain your logic. There are a lot of people like you and John that I just don’t understand. Here’s your chance to educate a lot of people. Go for it.

 

[Digitonomy]

In line with what I said above, some blame can certainly be laid on the House, which modified the bill, requiring a Senate vote on the amended measure. Not that this happens very often, but had the House passed the same bill as the Senate, it would have gone straight to the president.