Posted on 02/16/2017 8:33:24 PM PST by GonzoII
“We are hopeful this bill is a step towards ultimately defunding the nation's abortion giant.”
In a dramatic pro-life victory, the U.S. House of Representatives voted Thursday to allow states to decide whether or not to fund Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers with federal dollars. The 229-188 vote effectively repeals an Obama administration rule from December.
“As a registered nurse, I know that vulnerable women seeking true comprehensive care deserve better than abortion-centric facilities like Planned Parenthood,” Rep. Diane Black (R-TN), who introduced the resolution, stated before its Feb. 16 passage.
The Department of Health and Human Services issued a rule in December that states cannot deny federal Title X family planning grants to abortion providers like Planned Parenthood simply because they perform abortions.
States could deny funding only to clinics that did not provide the services for which Title X funds are meant, according to the Obama administration ruling. Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the pro-life group Susan B. Anthony List, called the rule a “parting gift to the abortion industry.” Family Research Council president Tony Perkins called the Obama HHS regulation a "backdoor handout for the abortion industry."
(Excerpt) Read more at ncregister.com ...
Ryan explained on Hannity yonkght that they have till end of Febuary to overturn a large group of these rulings
>> yonkght
Trying to figure the hand placement on that one...
Thumbs on a very small cell phone
I don’t understand why the HOR dems are so upset. Planned Parenthood can have their money to provide services women need (that’s their argument) if they give up abortion.
Glad to hear it. MY Choice is to keep my money in my wallet, where PP is concerned.
0bama’s “legacy” is crumbling right before his eyes.
Only 1/2 ass attempt so far.
They wanted to do, and do it CORRECTLY, they’d over-turn, defund and add that no court can touch the damn thing.
I don’t foresee them EVER touching the 3rd rail...I mean step.
A legal thought. We may get Roe reversed without having to prove the “illigitamacy” of abortion itself.
My attack would be that Roe never raised a FEDERAL issue in the first place. It is perhaps one of the most glaring examples of the Feds intruding into a state issue.
Arguing that in a 9 judge Roberts court could be a 6-3 winner
Awesome, so now what? How many Senate votes are needed?
"In a dramatic pro-life victory, the U.S. House of Representatives voted Thursday to allow states to decide whether or not to fund Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers with federal [emphasis added] dollars."
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
Patriots beware !
These hypocritical, uniparty lawmakers are once again giving us a dog-and-pony show.
More specifically, the states have never expressly constitutionally delegated to the feds the specific power to regulate, tax and spend for abortion purposes. This is evidenced by the following excerpts from the writings of previous generations of state sovereignty-respecting Supreme Court justices, the justices clarifying, in broad language, limits on the fed’s very few and specific constitutionally enumerated powers.
“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
Corrupt lawmakers are still trying to use stolen state revenues, revenues stolen by means of unconstitutional federal taxes, to buy votes from low-information, pro-abortion voters, such voters probably clueless about the fed’s constitutionally limited powers.
Drain the swamp! Drain the swamp!
Remember in November ’18 !
Since Trump entered the ’16 presidential race too late for patriots to make sure that there were state sovereignty-respecting candidates on the primary ballots, patriots need make sure that such candidates are on the ’18 primary ballots so that they can be elected to support Trump in draining the unconstitutionally big federal government swamp.
Such a Congress will also be able to finish draining the swamp with respect to getting the remaining state sovereignty-ignoring, activist justices off of the bench.
Noting that the primaries start in Iowa and New Hampshire in February ‘18, patriots need to challenge candidates for federal office in the following way.
Patriots need to qualify candidates by asking them why the Founding States made the Constitution’s Section 8 of Article I; to limit (cripple) the federal government’s powers.
Patriots also need to find candidates that are knowledgeable of the Supreme Court's clarifications of the federal government’s limited powers listed above.
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.