Murkowski to Schumer: I'll pass on your radical abortion bill, thanks (she must be up for reelection!)

hotair.com ^ | 5/10/22 | ED MORRISSEY

[cotton1706]

When you’ve lost Lisa Murkowski on abortion rights …

To be fair, though, Chuck Schumer all but guaranteed that outcome. In fact, he went out of his way to get it, as we’ll see:

Why would Murkowski object to a “Roe codification bill”? Murkowski and Susan Collins both have consistently supported not just the Supreme Court decision in Roe but also the one in Casey. The answer to this, of course, is that Schumer’s bill doesn’t “codify Roe,” but instead expands abortion access to the limit of gestation, right up to the moment of birth. It also would force providers to perform abortions regardless of religious or moral objections. And it would preclude states from regulating abortion in any way, shape, or form, regardless of what the voters in those states want.

If Schumer really wanted to only “codify Roe,” then he would have adopted a bill authored by Murkowski and Collins:

[Republican Wildcat]

(waiting for the first person to now show up and say I’m “praising” or “defending” Murkowski by just stating objective historical truths that have nothing to do with support for any candidate)

[Republican Wildcat]

It would be awesome if it didn’t even get 50 votes.

All Senators will indeed be on record as Schumer wants - they should have to defend their votes for this extreme measure. Do even a majority of voters in a deep blue state like Massachusetts support abortion up to the moment of birth with no regulations at all by the states? I doubt it. Let alone the more marginal states.

[gibsonguy]

So Rush Limbaugh made that up?