Prolife Position on (Texas) Budget Bill
Please let me know if you want ON or OFF my Texas ping list!. . .don't be shy.
No, you don't HAVE to be a Texan to get on this list!
Posted on 04/06/2005 10:13:25 PM PDT by hocndoc
Position on C.S.S.B 1 Amendments
TO: House Member
FROM: Joe Pojman, Ph.D., Executive Director
DATE: Wednesday, April 6, 2005
Dear Member,
As you consider the amendments to C.S.S.B 1, the General Appropriations Bill, please consider the position of Texas Alliance for Life on several amendments.
We ask that you vote to support the amendments supported by Texas Alliance for Life and that you vote to oppose those amendments opposed by Texas Alliance for Life.
Article 1, General Government
Page 17, Thompson, OPPOSE - This forces Texas taxpayers to fund as much as $15 million per fiscal year for embryonic stem cell research, which is opposed by numerous pro-life, pro-family organizations and runs counter to the federal policy of President Bush and the stated policy of Governor Perry.
Article 2, Health and Human Services
Page 27, Farrar, OPPOSE - This uses tax dollars to undermine parent's rights to oversee the heath care of their minor children.
Page 28, Farrar, OPPOSE - Conflicts with the sexual abuse reporting requirements of Chapter 261, Family Code, which require reporting of suspected sexual assault. The state should not be funding family planning providers who do not comply with state statutes intended to protect minors from sexual assault.
Page 29, Farrar, OPPOSE - Same as Farrar amendment on page 28.
Page 30, Naishtat, OPPOSE - Unnecessary. Compliance with federal law is already required of family planning providers.
Page 39, Dukes, OPPOSE - Unnecessary. Compliance with federal law is already required of family planning providers.
Page 46, Farrar, OPPOSE - This uses tax dollars to undermine parent's rights to oversee the heath care of their minor children.
Page 48, Farrar, OPPOSE - Undermines parent's rights to oversee the heath care of their minor children.
Page 49, Farrar, OPPOSE - Undermines parent's rights to oversee the health care of their minor children.
Page 54, Dukes, OPPOSE - Massive increase in family planning program, making Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers eligible for tens of millions of dollars. While federal law prohibits these funds from being spent to pay for abortions, these funds will be used to promote abortion for birth control and to refer pregnant women for abortions in Planned Parenthood's own abortion facilities.
Page 55, Menendez, SUPPORT - Funds an umbilical cord blood bank, a source of adult (non embryonic) stem cells, which are routinely used in medical treatments. Adult stem cells are a pro-life alternative to embryonic stem cells.
Page 68, Anchia, SUPPORT - Allows CHIP to cover unborn children as separate patients.
Article 3, Education
Page 100, Chisum, SUPPORT - Requires student health clinics at publicly-funded colleges and universities to display the "Women's Right to Know" brochures if other brochures are displayed. Those brochures, developed by the Texas Department of Health, provide unbiased and medically accurate information for pregnant women about abortion, characteristics of unborn children, and public and private agencies that provide compassionate alternatives to abortion.
P.O. Box 49137 * Austin, Texas 78765 * (512) 477-1244 * TexasAllianceforLife.org
One of the Representatives from San Antonio said that when he hears from 4 of his constituents, he considers that a mandate! You can make a difference.
I can't find the link to the amendments discussed, but I think this is a fair summary:
Page 17 - embryonic stem cell research which relies on the destruction of human embryos - should not be in State budget.
Pages 27,30,31,46,48,49 -- I believe there was an effort to allow physicians and family planning clinics who receive Texas tax money to dispense birth control without parental consent. Currently, where Federal money is used, the parents may *not* be informed without the child's permission. However, where State tax money is used, the parent *must* consent. I don't see a reason to carve a child's sexual activity out of the normal parent-child responsibility and do not believe that the physician-child confidentiality should override the family relationships. Parents are responsible for their children, are usually the ones who will have the child's best interest at heart, and should have the right to consent.
Pages 28,29 - I think this is the result of Texas Medical Association's resolution to change the state statutory rape laws so that the medical provider (such as a doctor or nurse practitioner in a family planning clinic, or even an abortion provider) could use his or her judgment as to whether or not to report. The abortion providers just lost a lawsuit because they did not report cases when they knew or should have known that the child was abused. They want this law changed.
Page 54 - the Federal judges took the teeth out of the law passed last session, Rider 8, so Planned Parenthood can use State funds to run a family planning clinic that refers to a Planned Parenthood abortion clinic (where they charge cash for abortions from $400 up). I believe that this is the initiative to expand State funding to pay for health care for women who would not otherwise qualify. I would be willing to pay higher taxes if you could promise me that none of my money supports Planned Parenthood, but I don't want to help them build their abortion clinics. Do you?
Page 55 - If they're going to raise taxes anyway, this is a good way to spend the money. Couples would currently pay $2000 to bank each child's umbilical cord blood, and the chances of ever needing it are very slim. However, if the State were to bank the blood, it would be available for research and to help more people. My granddaughter got a transplant that saved her life when she was 15 months old.
Page 66 - Prenatal care saves lives and medicaid money, too! On the other hand, because of the way the law works, if we count the momma instead of the unborn baby, we will have to pay for abortions.
Page 100 - College health clinics routinely refer to abortion clinics, but I think that those which use State money should give girls as much information as possible. If a woman can "have it all," why should she have to choose between college and the baby she's carrying?
For your consideration - could you ping your Texas lists?
BTW, next week, several bills, including some of the clone-and-kill bills (such as HB 749, which redefines "human cloning" as implanting the results of nuclear transfer into a uterus or the equivalent of a uterus), the Parental Consent Bill (HB 1212, which would require the same consent required for every other medical or surgical procedure for girls under 17 years old), will be heard in Committee.
BUMP!!
Thanks a bunch!
Prolife Position on (Texas) Budget Bill
Please let me know if you want ON or OFF my Texas ping list!. . .don't be shy.
No, you don't HAVE to be a Texan to get on this list!
It confirms something I have said for years, No ones life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session.
Really!
Thanks Meek! (what were you doing up at 4:30?)
Don't forget that, nowadays, it's life, liberty, property and our kids who aren't safe. (Not to mention chocolate, CocaCola, tater chips and cigarettes)(somehow, alcohol is never in that Tax mix.)
How can I get my headline back on the News or Front Page side bar? The vote is today or tomorrow and we're talkin' a lot of money, here. (Not to mention keeping our kids safe from predators.)
hehe! I overslept a little bit. :)I've always been an early bird. "Early to bed, early to rise"
usually fits my pattern.
Hey, thanks. A very useful and informative post. If/when you hear of the outcome, please to ping.
If I'm posting at 0430 it's due to the previous evening's festivities running long.
Cheers! :)
Thanks, I will. I was at work all day, so now I have to go surfin' to find what happened.
Some of the pro-life efforts worked out!
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/stategov/stories/MYSA040705.1A.lege_abortion.1b1daa096.html
Abortion limit tied to female health care
Web Posted: 04/07/2005 12:00 AM CDT
Lisa Sandberg
Express-News Austin Bureau
AUSTIN — The GOP-controlled state Senate on Wednesday approved legislation making more women eligible for government-funded health care, but it added an anti-abortion provision limiting the places where those women can access services.
The amendment to Senate Bill 747 would restrict state funding to organizations that "perform or promote abortions or contract or affiliate with entities that perform or promote abortions."
I love this part:
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/stategov/stories/MYSA040705.1A.lege_budget.1b22e20a7.html
While funding was the focus, debate on the massive two-year budget at times degenerated, particularly over a proposal to ban state health department funding for schools to teach either contraception or abstinence.
Although the amendment by Rep. Suzanna Gratia Hupp, R-Lampasas, was later withdrawn, it raised some eyebrows when Rep. Jessica Farrah, D-Houston, tried to amend Hupp's plan by requiring the Texas Health Department to use abstinence training funds to try and reduce the amount of teen pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases to include materials about contraceptives.
"They don't need to teach contraceptives," Hupp said in calling for members to defeat Farrah's measure. "They should not be in the business of teaching morality. They should be teaching anatomy and physiology ... tab A into slot B produces babies."
Sorry about that, thought I got it fixed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
