Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Frist a Major Shareholder in Reputed For-Profit Abortion Provider
Human Events ^ | 12-20-02 | Terry Jeffrey

Posted on 12/19/2002 10:26:29 PM PST by The Old Hoosier

Frist a Major Shareholder in Reputed For-Profit Abortion Provider
By Terence P. Jeffrey

Bill Frist (R.-Tenn.), reportedly the White House choice to succeed Trent Lott (R.-Miss.) as Senate majority leader, is a major shareholder in HCA, a for-profit hospital chain founded by his father and brother. HCA reportedly provides abortions to its customers.

So now Republicans face this question: If it is disqualifying for their Senate leader to make offensive remarks interpreted as endorsing an immoral policy that denied African-Americans equal rights, is it also disqualifying for their Senate leader to make money from a hospital chain that denies unborn babies the right to life?

Frist has deposited his major stockholdings in a "blind trust" chartered Dec. 28, 2000. A schedule of the original assets in this trust filed with the Senate showed holdings in 16 companies. Frist reported the value of these assets, as per Senate rules, within broad ranges (e.g. $1,001-$15,001). If the lowest possible value is assigned to each holding, Frist at that time had invested a minimum of $566,015 in 15 other companies, while investing at least $5,000,001 in HCA.

That would mean that approximately 89% of his holdings were in this company.

Furthermore, on its face, the trust agreement appears structured to allow the administrators to maintain this heavy concentration in HCA stock. It also specifically instructs the administrators to inform Frist if they divest entirely from any holding, including HCA. And, finally, it gives Frist the power to directly order the administrators to divest from HCA or any other holding that Frist determines "creates a conflict of interest or the appearance thereof."

HCA does not trumpet its reported involvement with abortion. But, in April, Catholic Financial Services Corporation (CFSC), a mutual fund company, announced that it was starting an S&P 500 Index Fund that would "exclude companies on the abortion issue"—and that HCA was one of only six companies on the index that would be excluded on these grounds. A spokesman for the mutual fund explained to me last week that the company excludes hospital chains that perform abortions and pharmaceutical companies that deal in drugs that induce abortion.

On December 18 and 19, I placed several calls to HCA corporate spokesman Jeff Prescott, to ask him directly whether abortions were performed in HCA facilities, or whether the company refuted CFSC’s determination that they were. I left him voice messages to this effect, and repeatedly told his secretary my questions. At 5:00 p.m. on the 19th, as press time approached, the secretary left me lingering on hold with no answer. When I hung up and called back, I got Prescott’s voice mail again and left him one last message. He never returned my call.

I also spoke with Sen. Frist’s spokesman, Nick Smith. I explained to Smith my understanding that the terms of Frist’s "blind" trust allowed the administrators to maintain a heavy concentration in HCA, while allowing Frist to order the sale of this stock, and while also compelling the administrators to inform Frist if they divested entirely from HCA or any other holding. I cited the specific passages in the trust to this effect. I also asked Smith to clarify Frist’s position on abortion—which has confounded pro-lifers over the years—and why Frist would not divest, since he apparently could, from a company that reportedly performs abortions.

When Frist first ran for the Senate in 1994, the Nashville Banner reported that he "frequently" said he "does not believe abortion should be outlawed." In a May 1994 radio interview, the Banner reported, Frist said, "It’s a very private decision." One of Frist’s Republican primary rivals, Steve Wilson, the Banner said, "demanded that Frist sell his millions of dollars in stock in the Hospital Corporation of America [HCA], which Frist’s family founded. Some of the hospitals in the chain perform abortions."

Tennessee Right to Life PAC Director Sherry Holden, however, told the Banner that Frist had told her organization he was pro-life. "He said he’s against abortion, period—no exceptions, except rape and incest," said Holden.

Yet, an Oct. 10, 1994, Memphis Commercial Appeal report on a debate between Frist and incumbent Sen. Jim Sasser (D.-Tenn.) said: "There were some topics on which the candidates agreed—both said they’re personally opposed to abortion but don’t think the government should prohibit abortions."

I asked Smith whether Frist wanted to prohibit abortion either by constitutional amendment or by over-turning Roe v. Wade and enacting prohibitions in the states, including Tennessee.

Smith responded by faxing me a statement. The White House, pro-life Republican senators, and their grassroots supporters can decide whether it is responsive:

"These two issues [the HCA investment and abortion] are separate and distinct," wrote Smith.

"On his own accord, by placing his assets in a federally qualified blind trust, Sen. Frist took a step above and beyond to ensure there is no conflict of interest," wrote Smith. "He believes this was the proper and responsible thing to do. He has never been employed by, or served on the board of, HCA or any of its hospitals.

"As a U.S. senator who acts on public policy each and every day, his record on abortion is clear," Smith continued. "He is opposed to abortion except in the instances of rape, incest and when the life of the mother is threatened. He is opposed to federal funding of abortion. And in the Senate, he led the fight against partial-birth abortion."

His Senate website includes a statement saying, "No one can deny the potential human cloning holds for increased scientific understanding. But . . . I am unable to find a compelling justification for allowing human cloning today."

As Bill Clinton might say, that doesn’t rule out tomorrow—when he may be Senate majority leader.



TOPICS: Breaking News; Politics/Elections; US: Tennessee
KEYWORDS: abortion; abortionlist; catholiclist; escr; frist; fristabortion; singleissueloser; terencepjeffrey; terryjeffrey
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 541-560561-580581-600601-610 next last
To: All
Here's some data on how Frist voted regarding abortion/family planning. Forgive me if it's already been posted, but I haven't got the time to go through 600 posts:

Abortion / Family Planning
2001-2002: On the votes that the National Right to Life Committee considered to be the most important in 2001-2002, Senator Frist voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.

2001: On the votes that the Planned Parenthood considered to be the most important from 1995 to 2001, Senator Frist voted their preferred position 0 percent of the time.

2001: On the votes that the National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action League considered to be the most important in 2001, Senator Frist voted their preferred position 0 percent of the time.

2000: On the votes that the National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action League considered to be the most important in 2000, Senator Frist voted their preferred position 20 percent of the time.

1999-2000: On the votes that the National Right to Life Committee considered to be the most important in 1999-2000, Senator Frist voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.

1999: On the votes that the National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action League considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Frist voted their preferred position 0 percent of the time.

1999: On the votes that the National Right to Life Committee considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Frist voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.

1999: On the votes that the Planned Parenthood considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Frist voted their preferred position 0 percent of the time.

This data comes from www.internal.vote-smart.org

Hope this helps.

581 posted on 12/20/2002 8:40:37 PM PST by Audit_Jesse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Audit_Jesse; patent
Dear Audit_Jesse,

"Hope this helps."

Yes, it helps a great deal. Thanks.


Dear patent,

This isn't all that bad a record, is it??

;-)


sitetest
582 posted on 12/20/2002 8:49:44 PM PST by sitetest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 581 | View Replies]

To: All
Sorry all, the correct URL is http://www.vote-smart.org/

Of course I can't vouch for it's reliability but it seems a sound source, I'll look for Santorum next.
583 posted on 12/20/2002 8:59:02 PM PST by Audit_Jesse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 581 | View Replies]

To: Audit_Jesse
Here's Santorum's for the same items. They have all kinds of issues there but as this was an abortion type thread, that's all I'm posting.

Abortion / Family Planning
2001-2002: On the votes that the National Right to Life Committee considered to be the most important in 2001-2002, Senator Santorum voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.

2001: On the votes that the Planned Parenthood considered to be the most important from 1995 to 2001, Senator Santorum voted their preferred position 0 percent of the time.

2001: On the votes that the National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action League considered to be the most important in 2001, Senator Santorum voted their preferred position 0 percent of the time.

2000: On the votes that the National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action League considered to be the most important in 2000, Senator Santorum voted their preferred position 20 percent of the time.

1999-2000: On the votes that the National Right to Life Committee considered to be the most important in 1999-2000, Senator Santorum voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.

1999: On the votes that the National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action League considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Santorum voted their preferred position 0 percent of the time.

1999: On the votes that the National Right to Life Committee considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Santorum voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.

1999: On the votes that the Planned Parenthood considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Santorum voted their preferred position 0 percent of the time.

Again, hope this helps.
584 posted on 12/20/2002 9:00:47 PM PST by Audit_Jesse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 583 | View Replies]

To: Audit_Jesse
Thanks for the info, Audit_Jesse. If it's been posted already, I missed it.

I think the Dems are shacking in their boots with the prospects of Bill Frist advancing our agenda in the Senate in next year. He is a good human being and a hard target for the Dems to trash.

They'll try. Fabrication is their strong suit.
585 posted on 12/20/2002 9:01:30 PM PST by auboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 581 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
FR seems to get more and more liberal each day.
586 posted on 12/20/2002 9:02:00 PM PST by MatthewViti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: auboy
Sorry - lack of editing skills - "in the Senate in next year" should be "in the Senate next year"
587 posted on 12/20/2002 9:06:57 PM PST by auboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 585 | View Replies]

To: MatthewViti
Sorry, haven't been able to read the hundreds of posts, what are you referring to, if I may ask? No sarcasm here, I mean this as an honest question. Thanks!
588 posted on 12/20/2002 9:13:48 PM PST by Audit_Jesse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 586 | View Replies]

To: SoCar; Amelia; justshe; Howlin
"You can be far right on every other issue, taxes, immigration, affirmative action, hate crimes, defense, etc., but if your'e not 100% pro life, WATCH OUT!! "

Sad, isn't it? An entire agenda of liberty and freedom is held as expendable so that a small coterie of religious extremists can feel good about themselves.

"the country is not ready to outlaw abortion. Even if we overturn Roe vs. Wade, abortion in some form will remain legal in the vast majority of states. Most people believe in parental notification and PBA, but not a full ban. They understand that forcing women who are young, unstable, and possibly drug addicted, to carry their babies to term with neglect and no prenatal care is folly."

Most of the zealots ignore this truth. Thus, I repost it. The funny thing is, I suspect that most of them also know this...but simply enjoy feeling holier than the rest of us barbarians.

589 posted on 12/20/2002 9:15:08 PM PST by Long Cut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 569 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green; Howlin
How dare you ask questions about a politicians record! The horror! On an issue of life no less!
590 posted on 12/20/2002 9:19:03 PM PST by Scholastic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: MatthewViti
What do you mean?
591 posted on 12/20/2002 9:23:28 PM PST by P-Marlowe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 586 | View Replies]

To: Long Cut
Thanks Long Cut! Sometimes I feel so lonely with my disgust for the zealots.
592 posted on 12/20/2002 9:24:21 PM PST by SoCar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 589 | View Replies]

To: SoCar
Trust me, you're not alone, even on FR. The zealots have a way of attacking anyone with whom they even slightly disagree as a "baby murderer" or worse. Many good folks choose not to play that game with them.

Therefore, it sometimes seems that their numbers are larger than they really are. It really is a matter of volume, not quantity.

I also find funny those who (rightly, in most cases), accusing the Left of living on "feelings" and "emotion" instead of facts and logic, instantly fall back upon those things when this issue comes up. For what else are we to conclude from the almost-constant harangues using the "baby killer" slur, or the always-popular "serial killer" to refer to ANYONE who does not think that forcing a rape or incest victim to bear a child begot from those crimes is a good thing?

At the very least, they should read over the definition of "serial killer". They might stop revealing their utter ignorance of the term.

593 posted on 12/20/2002 9:39:07 PM PST by Long Cut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 592 | View Replies]

To: Denver Ditdat
No surprise at all.
594 posted on 12/20/2002 9:49:16 PM PST by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 559 | View Replies]

To: Long Cut
Well, I for one will continue to voice my opinions on this issue. I hope you and others will do so too.
595 posted on 12/20/2002 10:02:59 PM PST by SoCar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 593 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
You may be a Republican, but you sure don't seem like a conservative. And if one does vote on the basis of one issue, I can't think of any issue more important than abortion. Without life, everything else we're fighting for is meaningless. I joined the Republican party solely on the abortion issue. Once I joined, I found I agreed with them on so many other things. The second ammendment, taxes, etc. But it was their pro-life stance that won me over.
596 posted on 12/20/2002 10:12:42 PM PST by lara
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: lara
I'm not a one issue voter; it's like tunnel vision. Or, if you prefer, like wearing blinders so you dont' have to see anybody else's opinion -- not that you'd want to.
597 posted on 12/20/2002 10:14:13 PM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 596 | View Replies]

To: lara
Just a question because I'm curious.

Let's say before you there is a fertilized egg in a petrie(sp?) dish and a living breathing adult or child. A diaster struck and you had a Soloman like decision to make. You could only save one. What would you do? If you believe that abortion is murder is there any distinction in your eyes?

I direct this question to all the staunch pro life one issue people out there.

598 posted on 12/20/2002 10:43:49 PM PST by SoCar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 596 | View Replies]

To: Audit_Jesse
Thanks for the information.
599 posted on 12/21/2002 9:20:12 AM PST by Gophack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 581 | View Replies]

To: relee

"Human rights are not a privilege conferred by government. They are every human being's entitlement by virtue of his humanity. The right to life does not depend, and must not be contingent, on the pleasure of anyone else, not even a parent or sovereign. ... You must weep that your own government, at present, seems blind to this truth."

-- Mother Teresa (born Agnes Gonxha Beiaxhiu - the *real* Sister Agnes), regarding abortion, in her closing remarks at her last prayer breakfast in the United States

"I was for abortion, I thought it was a woman's right to terminate pregnancy she did not want. Now I'm not so sure. I am a student nurse nearing the end of my OB-GYN rotation at a major metropolitan hospital and teaching center. It wasn't until I saw what abortion really involves that I changed my mind. After the first week in the abortion clinic several people in my clinical group were shaky about their previously positive feelings about abortion. This new attitude resulted from our actually seeing a Prostaglandin abortion, one similar in nature to the widely used saline abortion. . . this method is being used for terminations of pregnancies of sixteen weeks and over. I used to find rationales. the fetus isn't real. Abdomens aren't really very swollen. It isn't 'alive.' No more excuses...I am a member of the health profession and members of my class are now ambivalent about abortion. I now know a great deal more about what is involved in the issue. Women should perceive fully what abortion is; how destructive an act it is both for themselves and their unborn child. Whatever psychological coping mechanisms are employed during the process, the sight of a fetus in a hospital bedpan remains the final statement."

Quoted in "The Zero People: Essays on Life" by Jeff Lane Hensley, editor. Ann Arbor: Servant Books, 1983

"The doctors would remove the fetus while performing hysterotomies and then lay it on the table., where it would squirm until it died. ..They all had perfect forms and shapes. I couldn't take it. No nurse could."

--Joyce Craig, director of a Brooklyn clinic of Planned Parenthood. who assisted in abortion for two months, then quit. p 34 of "Rachel Weeping"

"From May to November 1988, I worked for an abortionist. He specializes in third trimester killings. I witnessed evidence of the brutal, cold blooded murder of over 600 viable, healthy babies at seven, eight and nine months gestation. A very, very few of these babies, less than 2%, were handicapped...I thought I was pro-choice and I was glad to be working in an abortion clinic. I thought I was helping provide a noble service to women in crisis....I was instructed to falsify the age of the babies in medical records. I was required to lie to the mothers over the phone, as they scheduled their appointments, and to tell them that they were not 'too far along' Then I had to note, in the records that Dr. Tiller's needle had successfully pierced the walls of the baby's heart, injecting the poison what brought death...one day, Dr. Tiller came up the stairs from the basement, where the mothers were in labor. He was carrying a large cardboard box, and ducked into the employees only area of the office so that he wouldn't have to walk through the waiting room. He passed behind my desk as I sat working on the computer, and he turned the corner to go around a short hall. He called out for me to come and help him. the box was so big and heavy in his arms that he couldn't get the key into the lock. So I unlocked the door for him, and , pushing the door open, I saw very clearly the gleaming metal of the crematorium- a full sized crematorium, just like the one's used in funeral homes. I went back to my computer. I could hear Dr. Tiller firing up the gas oven. A few minutes later I could smell burning human flesh. Mine was the agony of a participant, however reluctant, in the act of prenatal infanticide."

--Luhra Tivis on her experience in the abortion business Quoted in Celebrate Life Sept/Oct 1994 "Where is the Real Violence?"

"I am deeply troubled by my own increasing certainty that I have in fact presided over 60,000 deaths. There is no longer serious doubt in my mind that human life exists from the very onset of pregnancy"

--Dr. Bernard Nathanson, "Deeper Into Abortion" New England Journal of Medicine Nov 1974 p 1189

"You would just look in the buckets and see arms and legs. I have horrible dreams about that now. It was something you would see in a scary movie."

--Former clinic worker Kirsten Breedlove

My 23rd abortion changed my mind about doing abortions forever. This patient was a little overweight and ultimately proved to be a little farther along than anticipated. This was not an uncommon mistake before ultrasound was readily available to confirm the gestational age. Initially, the abortion proceeded normally. The water broke, but then nothing more would come out. When I withdrew the curette, I saw that it was plugged up with the leg of the baby which had been torn off. I then changed techniques and used ring forceps to dismember the 13 or 14 week size baby. Inside the remains of the rib cage I found a tiny, beating heart. I was finally able to remove the head and looked squarely into the face of a human being -- a human being that I had just killed.

-Dr. Paul Jarrett

"Please don't kill the child. I want the child. Please give me the child. I am willing to accept any child who would be aborted and to give that child to a married couple who will love the child and be loved by the child."

- M. Teresa, National Prayer breakfast, 2/3/94

"Each child is sent into this world by God with a unique message to deliver, a new song to sing, a personal act of love to bestow."

- John Powell, S.J.

"Once you permit the killing of the unborn child...you are setting off a chain reaction that will eventually make you the victim."

- Dr. R.A. Gallop, Univ. Of Montana

"Roe vs. Wade was a declaration of war on defensless baby boys and girls in the womb whose only 'crime' is that they exist."

- Dr. Wanda Franz, NRLC President


600 posted on 12/21/2002 10:10:58 AM PST by MatthewViti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 541-560561-580581-600601-610 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson