|
|
|
 |
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
|
It is in the breaking news sidebar! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
|
It is in the breaking news sidebar! |
|
By all means, STOPP, you should keep Planned Parenthood from being in the abortion and contaceptive businesses, as long as they receive a penny of government money.
But for crying out loud, why did you have to bring in the Natural Law argument (which, BTW, I totally agree with)? You just handed PP the ability to label you extremists, and to marginalize you. Many Americans don't buy into "sex-only-in-marriage" (they're wrong but that's not the point), and VERY FEW buy into the "Natural Law procreative-unitive argument" against contraception (again I AGREE with the argument, but again that not the point).
Is STOPP really advocating an ultimate LEGISLATIVE MANDATE of Natural Law? If I were PP, I'd sure say so, and most Americans would automatically view STOPP as a bunch of busybody religious zealots bent on enforcing their view of the world (which again I think is correct) on everyone else.
STOPP should limit its agenda to:
- Defunding all government money to PP (if individuals are nutty enough to contribute to them, you have to let them do so).
- Overturning Roe v. Wade.
If conservatives could get together and divvy up the research on nonprofits, we could generate our own PP spreadsheet. At the end of the day, we'd have a comprehensive analysis and donor exposure that would curdle the blood of the PP elites. One by one--that's how we'd have to do it. This is a research project worthy of the name.
Pew Charitable really loves the deaths of the unborn.
ProLife Ping!
If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
For many years the Susan G. Komen Foundation has been collecting money to help breast cancer victims. It has also been giving almost $500,000 a year to Planned Parenthood. Despite repeated educational attempts by pro-lifers across the country, Komen has refused to end its relationship with Planned Parenthood. Komen's main source of income is its "Race for the Cure" events that are held across the country. These events get ordinary citizens to raise money for the organization.
Given its long-time connection with Planned Parenthood, we ask all of you to have no involvement with the Komen Foundation and to discourage others from helping it. Documentation on the involvement of Planned Parenthood and Komen can be found on the web site of Pro-Life Waco, an American Life League associate group dedicated to fighting Planned Parenthood.
A creative alternative to Komen
Many people want to help breast cancer victims and wonder what they can do besides giving to the Komen Foundation. We received the following announcement from Barbara Myers of Pro-Life Waco. It is a creative answer to the question. We pass it on so you might consider similar actions in your own communities:
Dear pro-life friends,We have been encouraging you to let Susan G. Komen of Central Texas know of your displeasure at their relationship with Planned Parenthood of Central Texas. In the name of helping needy women receive mammography, Komen's unnecessary grant of $45,000 to Planned Parenthood helps them to appear as a caring medical facility instead of the evil abortion business that they really are. Many pro-lifers have responded in amazing ways.
Donna and Wayne Garner have taken a lemon and turned it into lemonade. Recently, their friend's wife passed away from breast cancer. Kathy was a truly pro-life Christian woman. After hearing of a team running in the Komen Race for the Cure in Kathy's name, they went into action. Discouraging all those who signed up from running in her name, they found the perfect way to memorialize Kathy and help other women fight breast cancer without supporting Planned Parenthood. Donna and Wayne contacted the Hillcrest Hospital Department of Development and set up a memorial account in Kathy's name. The money will be used for mammograms for women who do not have the ability to pay. Many people make the mistake of thinking that Susan G. Komen is the only source of helping and treating women with breast cancer. The Komen organization grows fatter each year and refuses to inform women of the abortion/breast cancer link while partnering with Planned Parenthood abortion facilities.Here is your alternative to help women in your own community!
Pro-Life Waco will start with a donation of $100. We encourage you to join us and encourage all your friends to donate. We will take away Komen's last feeble excuse that Planned Parenthood is their only hope of reaching out to needy women. Thank you for all your efforts to raise awareness of the sacredness and beauty of all human life. Rather than curse the darkness, we will never stop lighting candles for life. Please forward to your friends.
Hillcrest Health Foundation
P.O. Box 5100
Waco, TX 76708
Phone: 254-202-4560
Mark your check to "Kathy Verett Memorial Account - Breastscreening "God bless you,
Barbara Myers
Pro-Life Waco
bmyers@prolifewaco.org
Judge orders Planned Parenthood paid with our money
Here is the scenario. State lawmakers in Idaho pass a law that requires parental notification when a minor seeks an abortion. Planned Parenthood of Idaho does not want parents involved and files a lawsuit to overturn the law. Planned Parenthood, which nationally receives one third of its income from the American taxpayer, spends over $580,000 on lawyers and eventually gets the law declared unconstitutional.
Then, Planned Parenthood sues to get the taxpayers of Idaho to pay for its lawyers. This week, U.S. District Judge Mikel Williams ruled that the state must pay more than $380,000 of Planned Parenthood's attorney fees. This is ridiculous! Let's stop all taxpayer money going to Planned Parenthood and we will not have to put up with these lawsuits that keep parents out of their children's lives. Sign our petition online.
Rapid City pro-lifers send Planned Parenthood scurrying for place to hold news conference
Recently Planned Parenthood scheduled news conferences in both Sioux Falls and Rapid City, South Dakota. The purpose of the news conferences was to announce the beginning of a drive to collect signatures to force a ballot referendum to overturn South Dakota's new law that bans all medical and surgical abortions in the state. Planned Parenthood first scheduled its news conference in a government and school administrative building in Rapid City. When local pro-lifers were alerted to this, they made calls to officials the day before the scheduled news conference and got it cancelled. Planned Parenthood scurried and announced the news conference would take place at a local senior citizens center. The morning of the news conference, pro-lifers again made phone calls and alerted the management of the senior citizens center and again, the news conference was cancelled.
Planned Parenthood scurried again and made last-minute arrangements, and finally held the news conference in a local hotel. When pro-lifers contacted the hotel management after the event, the hotel apologized. They said they were not aware of the purpose of the news conference and that they would not rent a room for such a purpose again. Congratulations to the pro-lifers in Rapid City for their outstanding work and persistence. Planned Parenthood is going to have a real tough time convincing South Dakotans to overturn their new abortion law. At the invitation of these same pro-lifers, STOPP's Jim Sedlak will be speaking in Rapid City on April 28. We look forward to seeing all our friends again.
What is Planned Parenthood hiding?
Planned Parenthood Federation of America still has not issued its 2004-2005 annual report. Although it has made public its service numbers, Planned Parenthood has not released any federation-wide financial numbers. Historically, these numbers have been made public in December of each year. It is now April and we have yet to see any financial data from Planned Parenthood. What are they trying to hide? It is time to demand these numbers. We ask you all to contact your elected officials and ask them to go to Planned Parenthood and ask for the 2004-2005 financial data for the entire federation.
We ask you all to go to local reporters and ask them to get the same data and, if Planned Parenthood refuses, ask them to investigate what Planned Parenthood is trying to hide. An organization that, in 2003-2004, received 33 percent of its income from the American taxpayer should not be allowed to operate in the dark. Demand to know what Planned Parenthood is hiding. It is your right.
Please FreepMail me if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.
The Knights of Columbus had a petition at church tonight for people to sign.
S.1173
Title: A bill to protect, consistent with Roe v. Wade, a woman's freedom to choose to bear a child or terminate a pregnancy, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Boxer, Barbara [CA] (introduced 4/19/2007) Cosponsors (19)
Related Bills: H.R.1964
Latest Major Action: 4/19/2007 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Jump to: Summary, Major Actions, All Actions, Titles, Cosponsors, Committees, Related Bill Details, Amendments
SUMMARY AS OF:
4/19/2007--Introduced.
Freedom of Choice Act - Declares that it is the policy of the United States that every woman has the fundamental right to choose to: (1) bear a child; (2) terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability; or (3) terminate a pregnancy after fetal viability when necessary to protect her life or her health.
Prohibits a federal, state, or local governmental entity from: (1) denying or interfering with a woman's right to exercise such choices; or (2) discriminating against the exercise of those rights in the regulation or provision of benefits, facilities, services, or information. Provides that such prohibition shall apply retroactively.
Authorizes an individual aggrieved by a violation of this Act to obtain appropriate relief, including relief against a governmental entity, in a civil action.
MAJOR ACTIONS:
***NONE***
ALL ACTIONS:
- 4/19/2007:
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
TITLE(S): (italics indicate a title for a portion of a bill)
- SHORT TITLE(S) AS INTRODUCED:
Freedom of Choice Act
- OFFICIAL TITLE AS INTRODUCED:
A bill to protect, consistent with Roe v. Wade, a woman's freedom to choose to bear a child or terminate a pregnancy, and for other purposes.
COSPONSORS(19), ALPHABETICAL [followed by Cosponsors withdrawn]: (Sort: by date)
Sen Baucus, Max [MT] - 4/19/2007
Sen Bingaman, Jeff [NM] - 4/19/2007
Sen Brown, Sherrod [OH] - 5/2/2007
Sen Cantwell, Maria [WA] - 4/19/2007
Sen Cardin, Benjamin L. [MD] - 4/19/2007
Sen Clinton, Hillary Rodham [NY] - 4/19/2007
Sen Feinstein, Dianne [CA] - 4/19/2007
Sen Kerry, John F. [MA] - 6/13/2007
Sen Lautenberg, Frank R. [NJ] - 4/19/2007
Sen Lieberman, Joseph I. [CT] - 4/23/2007
Sen Menendez, Robert [NJ] - 4/19/2007
Sen Mikulski, Barbara A. [MD] - 4/19/2007
Sen Murray, Patty [WA] - 4/19/2007
Sen Obama, Barack [IL] - 5/11/2007
Sen Sanders, Bernard [VT] - 4/25/2007
Sen Schumer, Charles E. [NY] - 4/19/2007
Sen Stabenow, Debbie [MI] - 4/19/2007
Sen Tester, Jon [MT] - 4/23/2007
Sen Whitehouse, Sheldon [RI] - 6/6/2007
COMMITTEE(S):
Committee/Subcommittee: Activity: Senate Judiciary Referral, In Committee
RELATED BILL DETAILS: (additional related bills may be indentified in Status)
Bill: Relationship: H.R.1964 Related bill identified by CRS
AMENDMENT(S):***NONE***
The actual contents of the bill are as follows:
S 1173 IS
110th CONGRESS
1st Session S. 1173 To protect, consistent with Roe v. Wade, a woman's freedom to choose to bear a child or terminate a pregnancy, and for other purposes.
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
April 19, 2007 Mrs. BOXER (for herself, Mrs. MURRAY, Ms. STABENOW, Mr. BINGAMAN, Mr. MENENDEZ, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. CARDIN, Mr. SCHUMER, Mrs. CLINTON, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, Ms. MIKULSKI, Mr. BAUCUS, and Ms. CANTWELL) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
A BILL To protect, consistent with Roe v. Wade, a woman's freedom to choose to bear a child or terminate a pregnancy, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Freedom of Choice Act'.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
(1) The United States was founded on core principles, such as liberty, personal privacy, and equality, which ensure that individuals are free to make their most intimate decisions without governmental interference and discrimination.
(2) One of the most private and difficult decisions an individual makes is whether to begin, prevent, continue, or terminate a pregnancy. Those reproductive health decisions are best made by women, in consultation with their loved ones and health care providers.
(3) In 1965, in Griswold v. Connecticut (381 U.S. 479), and in 1973, in Roe v. Wade (410 U.S. 113) and Doe v. Bolton (410 U.S. 179), the Supreme Court recognized that the right to privacy protected by the Constitution encompasses the right of every woman to weigh the personal, moral, and religious considerations involved in deciding whether to begin, prevent, continue, or terminate a pregnancy.
(4) The Roe v. Wade decision carefully balances the rights of women to make important reproductive decisions with the State's interest in potential life. Under Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, the right to privacy protects a woman's decision to choose to terminate her pregnancy prior to fetal viability, with the State permitted to ban abortion after fetal viability except when necessary to protect a woman's life or health.
(5) These decisions have protected the health and lives of women in the United States. Prior to the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, an estimated 1,200,000 women each year were forced to resort to illegal abortions, despite the risk of unsanitary conditions, incompetent treatment, infection, hemorrhage, disfiguration, and death. Before Roe, it is estimated that thousands of women died annually in the United States as a result of illegal abortions.
(6) In countries in which abortion remains illegal, the risk of maternal mortality is high. According to the World Health Organization, of the approximately 600,000 pregnancy-related deaths occurring annually around the world, 80,000 are associated with unsafe abortions.
(7) The Roe v. Wade decision also expanded the opportunities for women to participate equally in society. In 1992, in Planned Parenthood v. Casey (505 U.S. 833), the Supreme Court observed that, `[t]he ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives.'.
(8) Even though the Roe v. Wade decision has stood for more than 34 years, there are increasing threats to reproductive health and freedom emerging from all branches and levels of government. In 2006, South Dakota became the first State in more than 15 years to enact a ban on abortion in nearly all circumstances. Supporters of this ban have admitted it is an attempt to directly challenge Roe in the courts. Other States are considering similar bans.
(9) Further threatening Roe, the Supreme Court recently upheld the first-ever Federal ban on an abortion procedure, which has no exception to protect a woman's health. The majority decision in Gonzales v. Carhart (05-380, slip op. April 18, 2007) and Gonzales v. Planned Parenthood Federation of America fails to protect a woman's health, a core tenet of Roe v. Wade. Dissenting in that case, Justice Ginsburg called the majority's opinion `alarming', and stated that, `[f]or the first time since Roe, the Court blesses a prohibition with no exception safeguarding a woman's health'. Further, she said, the Federal ban `and the Court's defense of it cannot be understood as anything other than an effort to chip away at a right declared again and again by this Court'.
(10) Legal and practical barriers to the full range of reproductive services endanger women's health and lives. Incremental restrictions on the right to choose imposed by Congress and State legislatures have made access to reproductive care extremely difficult, if not impossible, for many women across the country. Currently, 87 percent of the counties in the United States have no abortion provider.
(11) While abortion should remain safe and legal, women should also have more meaningful access to family planning services that prevent unintended pregnancies, thereby reducing the need for abortion.
(12) To guarantee the protections of Roe v. Wade, Federal legislation is necessary.
(13) Although Congress may not create constitutional rights without amending the Constitution, Congress may, where authorized by its enumerated powers and not prohibited by the Constitution, enact legislation to create and secure statutory rights in areas of legitimate national concern.
(14) Congress has the affirmative power under section 8 of article I of the Constitution and section 5 of the 14th amendment to the Constitution to enact legislation to facilitate interstate commerce and to prevent State interference with interstate commerce, liberty, or equal protection of the laws.
(15) Federal protection of a woman's right to choose to prevent or terminate a pregnancy falls within this affirmative power of Congress, in part, because--
(A) many women cross State lines to obtain abortions and many more would be forced to do so absent a constitutional right or Federal protection;
(B) reproductive health clinics are commercial actors that regularly purchase medicine, medical equipment, and other necessary supplies from out-of-State suppliers; and
(C) reproductive health clinics employ doctors, nurses, and other personnel who travel across State lines in order to provide reproductive health services to patients.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) GOVERNMENT- The term `government' includes a branch, department, agency, instrumentality, or official (or other individual acting under color of law) of the United States, a State, or a subdivision of a State.
(2) STATE- The term `State' means each of the States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and each territory or possession of the United States.
(3) VIABILITY- The term `viability' means that stage of pregnancy when, in the best medical judgment of the attending physician based on the particular medical facts of the case before the physician, there is a reasonable likelihood of the sustained survival of the fetus outside of the woman.
SEC. 4. INTERFERENCE WITH REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH PROHIBITED.
(a) Statement of Policy- It is the policy of the United States that every woman has the fundamental right to choose to bear a child, to terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability, or to terminate a pregnancy after fetal viability when necessary to protect the life or health of the woman.
(b) Prohibition of Interference- A government may not--
(1) deny or interfere with a woman's right to choose--
(A) to bear a child;
(B) to terminate a pregnancy prior to viability; or
(C) to terminate a pregnancy after viability where termination is necessary to protect the life or health of the woman; or
(2) discriminate against the exercise of the rights set forth in paragraph (1) in the regulation or provision of benefits, facilities, services, or information.
(c) Civil Action- An individual aggrieved by a violation of this section may obtain appropriate relief (including relief against a government) in a civil action.
SEC. 5. SEVERABILITY.
If any provision of this Act, or the application of such provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be unconstitutional, the remainder of this Act, or the application of such provision to persons or circumstances other than those as to which the provision is held to be unconstitutional, shall not be affected thereby.
SEC. 6. RETROACTIVE EFFECT.
This Act applies to every Federal, State, and local statute, ordinance, regulation, administrative order, decision, policy, practice, or other action enacted, adopted, or implemented before, on, or after the date of enactment of this Act.
END
House Bill
H.R.1964
Title: To protect, consistent with Roe v. Wade, a woman's freedom to choose to bear a child or terminate a pregnancy, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Nadler, Jerrold [NY-8] (introduced 4/19/2007) Cosponsors (109)
Related Bills: S.1173
Latest Major Action: 5/4/2007 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties.
COSPONSORS(109), ALPHABETICAL [followed by Cosponsors withdrawn]: (Sort: by date)
Rep Abercrombie, Neil [HI-1] - 4/19/2007 Rep Ackerman, Gary L. [NY-5] - 4/19/2007 Rep Allen, Thomas H. [ME-1] - 4/19/2007 Rep Arcuri, Michael A. [NY-24] - 4/19/2007 Rep Baird, Brian [WA-3] - 7/11/2007 Rep Baldwin, Tammy [WI-2] - 4/19/2007 Rep Berkley, Shelley [NV-1] - 4/19/2007 Rep Berman, Howard L. [CA-28] - 4/19/2007 Rep Blumenauer, Earl [OR-3] - 4/19/2007 Rep Boucher, Rick [VA-9] - 4/19/2007 Rep Capps, Lois [CA-23] - 4/19/2007 Rep Capuano, Michael E. [MA-8] - 4/30/2007 Rep Carnahan, Russ [MO-3] - 7/16/2007 Rep Carson, Julia [IN-7] - 10/22/2007 Rep Castor, Kathy [FL-11] - 4/23/2007 Rep Clarke, Yvette D. [NY-11] - 4/23/2007 Rep Clay, Wm. Lacy [MO-1] - 4/20/2007 Rep Cohen, Steve [TN-9] - 4/19/2007 Rep Conyers, John, Jr. [MI-14] - 4/19/2007 Rep Crowley, Joseph [NY-7] - 12/5/2007 Rep Davis, Danny K. [IL-7] - 4/19/2007 Rep Davis, Susan A. [CA-53] - 4/19/2007 Rep DeFazio, Peter A. [OR-4] - 4/19/2007 Rep DeGette, Diana [CO-1] - 5/2/2007 Rep DeLauro, Rosa L. [CT-3] - 7/11/2007 Rep Ellison, Keith [MN-5] - 4/19/2007 Rep Emanuel, Rahm [IL-5] - 4/19/2007 Rep Engel, Eliot L. [NY-17] - 3/31/2008 Rep Eshoo, Anna G. [CA-14] - 5/10/2007 Rep Farr, Sam [CA-17] - 4/19/2007 Rep Fattah, Chaka [PA-2] - 4/19/2007 Rep Filner, Bob [CA-51] - 4/19/2007 Rep Frank, Barney [MA-4] - 4/19/2007 Rep Giffords, Gabrielle [AZ-8] - 6/21/2007 Rep Green, Al [TX-9] - 1/28/2008 Rep Green, Gene [TX-29] - 4/23/2007 Rep Grijalva, Raul M. [AZ-7] - 4/19/2007 Rep Gutierrez, Luis V. [IL-4] - 1/22/2008 Rep Harman, Jane [CA-36] - 4/19/2007 Rep Hastings, Alcee L. [FL-23] - 5/2/2007 Rep Hirono, Mazie K. [HI-2] - 4/19/2007 Rep Holt, Rush D. [NJ-12] - 4/19/2007 Rep Honda, Michael M. [CA-15] - 4/19/2007 Rep Inslee, Jay [WA-1] - 4/19/2007 Rep Israel, Steve [NY-2] - 4/23/2007 Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. [IL-2] - 4/19/2007 Rep Jackson-Lee, Sheila [TX-18] - 4/19/2007 Rep Johnson, Henry C. "Hank," Jr. [GA-4] - 6/12/2007 Rep Jones, Stephanie Tubbs [OH-11] - 9/4/2007 Rep Kennedy, Patrick J. [RI-1] - 1/28/2008 Rep Kucinich, Dennis J. [OH-10] - 4/19/2007 Rep Lantos, Tom [CA-12] - 4/19/2007 Rep Larsen, Rick [WA-2] - 4/19/2007 Rep Lee, Barbara [CA-9] - 4/19/2007 Rep Lewis, John [GA-5] - 5/3/2007 Rep Loebsack, David [IA-2] - 4/19/2007 Rep Lofgren, Zoe [CA-16] - 5/3/2007 Rep Lowey, Nita M. [NY-18] - 4/19/2007 Rep Maloney, Carolyn B. [NY-14] - 4/19/2007 Rep Matsui, Doris O. [CA-5] - 4/19/2007 Rep McCarthy, Carolyn [NY-4] - 4/23/2007 Rep McCollum, Betty [MN-4] - 4/19/2007 Rep McDermott, Jim [WA-7] - 4/19/2007 Rep McGovern, James P. [MA-3] - 4/23/2007 Rep McNerney, Jerry [CA-11] - 6/6/2007 Rep Meehan, Martin T. [MA-5] - 6/14/2007 Rep Miller, Brad [NC-13] - 4/19/2007 Rep Miller, George [CA-7] - 5/2/2007 Rep Mitchell, Harry E. [AZ-5] - 5/23/2007 Rep Moore, Gwen [WI-4] - 4/23/2007 Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8] - 4/19/2007 Rep Murphy, Christopher S. [CT-5] - 4/30/2007 Rep Murphy, Patrick J. [PA-8] - 9/9/2008 Rep Napolitano, Grace F. [CA-38] - 6/21/2007 Rep Norton, Eleanor Holmes [DC] - 4/20/2007 Rep Olver, John W. [MA-1] - 4/19/2007 Rep Pallone, Frank, Jr. [NJ-6] - 1/22/2008 Rep Payne, Donald M. [NJ-10] - 4/24/2007 Rep Price, David E. [NC-4] - 6/6/2007 Rep Rangel, Charles B. [NY-15] - 4/23/2007 Rep Rothman, Steven R. [NJ-9] - 4/30/2007 Rep Ruppersberger, C. A. Dutch [MD-2] - 1/29/2008 Rep Sanchez, Linda T. [CA-39] - 4/19/2007 Rep Sanchez, Loretta [CA-47] - 5/21/2007 Rep Schakowsky, Janice D. [IL-9] - 4/19/2007 Rep Schwartz, Allyson Y. [PA-13] - 10/15/2007 Rep Shays, Christopher [CT-4] - 4/19/2007 Rep Shea-Porter, Carol [NH-1] - 4/23/2007 Rep Sherman, Brad [CA-27] - 5/3/2007 Rep Slaughter, Louise McIntosh [NY-28] - 4/19/2007 Rep Solis, Hilda L. [CA-32] - 4/19/2007 Rep Stark, Fortney Pete [CA-13] - 4/19/2007 Rep Sutton, Betty [OH-13] - 4/19/2007 Rep Tauscher, Ellen O. [CA-10] - 6/18/2007 Rep Thompson, Mike [CA-1] - 4/19/2007 Rep Tierney, John F. [MA-6] - 5/3/2007 Rep Towns, Edolphus [NY-10] - 4/19/2007 Rep Tsongas, Niki [MA-5] - 2/12/2008 Rep Van Hollen, Chris [MD-8] - 5/2/2007 Rep Velazquez, Nydia M. [NY-12] - 6/6/2007 Rep Wasserman Schultz, Debbie [FL-20] - 4/23/2007 Rep Watson, Diane E. [CA-33] - 4/19/2007 Rep Waxman, Henry A. [CA-30] - 4/19/2007 Rep Weiner, Anthony D. [NY-9] - 4/19/2007 Rep Welch, Peter [VT] - 5/21/2007 Rep Wexler, Robert [FL-19] - 4/19/2007 Rep Woolsey, Lynn C. [CA-6] - 4/19/2007 Rep Wu, David [OR-1] - 4/23/2007 Rep Wynn, Albert Russell [MD-4] - 4/23/2007
Rep Porter, Jon C. [NV-3] - 4/19/2007(withdrawn - 4/23/2007)
In the midst of all the uproar over Planned Parenthood’s involvement in baby body parts, another possibly illegal effort by Planned Parenthood has been brought to light by a courageous state legislator. Planned Parenthood is noted for establishing long-term plans and then working relentlessly to carry out those plans. In 1973, the Supreme Court issued the Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions that effectively decriminalized abortion throughout the country. At the time, newspaper reporters noted the rise in opposition to abortion and asked Planned Parenthood how it was going to ensure the decisions were not overturned.
On May 3, 1973, Dr. Alan Guttmacher, then president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, told the Washington Star newspaper: "Then how can the Supreme Court decision be absolutely secured? The answer to winning the battle for elective abortion once and for all is sex education." Since that time, Planned Parenthood has been fighting the battle for abortion in school classrooms all across the country. It knows that its sex programs get more young people involved in sex. This increases the sale of birth control products—sold at a huge profit by Planned Parenthood. When the birth control products fail, as they all do, Planned Parenthood sells these same children abortions—garnering an even larger profit.
All this has played out over the last few years in Hawaii. The people of Hawaii have been fighting an outrageous program called Pono Choices, which we’ve covered in past issues of the WSR. Recognizing the rights and interests of parents, the Hawaii Department of Education changed the way sex education is taught and issued new regulations requiring that parents must “opt-in” to any sex program. Planned Parenthood tried hard to undo this change and championed a bill in the legislature to do just that. The bill could not get support and died. Planned Parenthood then targeted the Hawaii Board of Education—which has the power to overrule the Department of Education. After intensive lobbying by PP, the Board of Education reversed the Education Department’s regulations and re-established an “opt-out” policy which virtually assures mandatory sex education.
While PP celebrates, Representative Bob McDermott (HD40 Ewa Beach) has sent a letter to the IRS asking it to investigate allegations that Planned Parenthood excessively lobbied the state legislature and the Board of Education in order to gain valuable curriculum development contracts in Hawaii’s public school system.
Using Planned Parenthood’s own documents, McDermott showed the extent of Planned Parenthood’s activities and asked the IRS to look at seven specific points:
1. Whether the 501(c)(3) organization, now known as Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest and Hawaiian Islands, conducted inappropriate "educational activities" or engaged in illegal and excessive lobbying based on the substantial part test or expenditure test. Per the Hawaii State Ethics Commission website, the 501(c)(3) organization has one registered lobbyist for 2015-2016 and her name is Laurie Ann Temple Field.
2. How are all their activities, including posing for photos on Facebook with state legislators on the grounds of the State Capitol building, considered "educational" as defined under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code?
3. What was communicated in their conversations with state legislators and members of the Hawaii Board of Education?
4. How frequently did the organization's lobbyist(s) communicate with state legislators and members of the Hawaii Board of Education? What do the Board of Education's visitor logs show?
5. How much time did the organization spend on lobbying activities, relative to other activities conducted by the organization?
6. How much money did the organization spend on lobbying activities, relative to other activities funded by the organization?
7. Did Planned Parenthood ever disclose their blatant financial conflict of interest as a curriculum advisor/developer when relentlessly lobbying for these changes at the Legislature and the State Board of Education?
ACTION:
1) Pray for Rep. McDermott as he goes forward in this battle.
2) Planned Parenthood pushes its sex programs in every state, especially focusing on middle schools. Please fight PP sex programs. Jim Sedlak’s book Parent Power!! will assist you in this fight.
Congressional committee demands information from Planned Parenthood
On August 14, the House Oversight Committee sent a letter to Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, requiring her to submit the following information by August 28, 2015:
1. For each year from 2010 through present, provide the cumulative amount of funding that Planned Parenthood received from the federal government, and identify all program(s), grant(s), and other sources of the federal funds.
2. For each year from 2010 through present, provide all financial statements and annual reports, including but not limited to Internal Revenue Service Form 990, Return of Organization Exempt from Income Tax.
3. For each year from 2010 through present, identify and provide an accounting of all Planned Parenthood activities that were financed with federal funds, to include the specific amount of federal funds used for each expenditure.
4. For each year from 2010 through present, provide the cumulative amount of funding that Planned Parenthood received from Medicaid programs by state.
5. For each year from 2010 through present, provide a list of the 50 highest paid Planned Parenthood employees. Include the individual’s title, annual salary, bonuses, and any other compensation.
6. According to the 2013-2014 Annual Report, Planned Parenthood “supports 66 independently incorporated affiliates, operating approximately 700 health centers across the U.S.” Provide a list of these affiliates and health centers including a contact with phone number or e-mail for each.
7. Identify, specifically, what procedures services, or other medical treatments are available only or exclusively at a Planned Parenthood affiliate or health center that are covered by either a state’s Medicaid program or a health plan sold via a state exchange or HealthCare.gov under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Do not include services or procedures that could otherwise be provided by a private health care provider.
Clearly, the committee is trying to cut through the rhetoric and identify specifically why Planned Parenthood claims it is so necessary to the general public. Other sources have reported that, while there are only 662 Planned Parenthood centers in the country, there are over 11,000 Federally Qualified Health Centers that can do everything Planned Parenthood does except abortions.
National Day of Protest at Planned Parenthood grows to 300 locations
As part of the current efforts against Planned Parenthood, a coalition of 53 groups, including American Life League and STOPP International, is calling for a National Day of Protest this Saturday, August 22, 2015, at Planned Parenthood facilities all across America. Our goal is to raise awareness of the heartless and even illegal activities of Planned Parenthood by going to where the killing and harvesting of body parts from aborted children takes place. Creating a presence at neighborhood Planned Parenthood facilities is essential to inform the public about what goes on behind closed doors. Local sidewalk counselors and activists are a key component to shutting down Planned Parenthood in the long term. The National Day of Protest will strengthen local efforts by raising their profile with the local press, the community, and other pro-life activists. Together, the protests held on August 22 will put pressure on the media, both local and national, to report the truth about Planned Parenthood, and on government officials to stop funding this discredited organization.
We encourage all the readers of the Wednesday STOPP Report to participate in this event.
What: Protest PP’s harvesting and selling of aborted baby parts
Where: Planned Parenthood facilities across America
When: August 22, 2015, from 9:00 a.m. - 11:00 a.m.
As we were going to press with this edition of the WSR, there were almost 300 protests in 44 states scheduled for August 22. Join or start one in your area.
To find out more information, locate a protest near you, or start your own protest, go to ProtestPP.com.
See you on the streets on August 22.
More states cutting Planned Parenthood funds
Despite efforts by the Obama administration to force states to provide Medicaid and other funding to Planned Parenthood, the momentum against PP continues to roll. Last week, Arkansas governor Asa Hutchinson reportedly ordered the Department of Human Services in the state to sever its Medicaid contract with Planned Parenthood. Governor Hutchinson said, “It is apparent that after recent revelations on the actions of Planned Parenthood, that this organization does not represent the values of the people of our state and Arkansas is better served by terminating any and all existing contracts with them.”
In Utah, Governor Gary Herbert told the Utah Department of Health to “stop distributing federal funds to the Planned Parenthood Association of Utah,” Utah senate president Wayne Niederhauser said, “I wouldn’t support any more money going to Planned Parenthood. I think we ought to be looking at other organizations that are qualified.” These two states join Alabama, Louisiana, and New Hampshire in taking money away from Planned Parenthood after the release of undercover videos at Planned Parenthood locations.
The Obama administration is warning states that they cannot stop Medicaid funds from going to Planned Parenthood, but the governors have pointed out that the contracts signed by Planned Parenthood have clauses allowing either party to cancel the contracts with appropriate (15 – 30 day) notice. Let’s all continue to praise God for the victories He is giving to people who have been fighting Planned Parenthood for so long. If we continue to pray, and act, it may be possible that Planned Parenthood may not survive to see its 100th birthday on October 16, 2016.
By Jim Sedlak
It’s the day after Election Day and political pundits are going to spin the results of this election every which way but loose. There is going to be detailed analysis of what went right and what went wrong. But, the fact is, this was a very normal outcome for a mid-term election and, if anything, the numbers actually aren’t as bad as they could be.
> > Continue reading this article here.
The main focus of much of the pro-life movement over the last decade has been ending federal funding of Planned Parenthood. Ever since 2007, when Mike Pence (then a member of Congress, now vice president of the United States) introduced the first-ever amendment to a spending bill that sought to keep all money in that bill away from Planned Parenthood, by name, ending federal funding of PP has been seen as possible. During the Obama years, President Obama was inexplicably in love with Planned Parenthood and even threatened to close down the entire federal government rather than take a dime away from the organization.
> > Continue reading this article here.
In addition to the numerous candidates for Congress and other offices, there were two amendments that Planned Parenthood actively fought against in this week’s election; they lost both fights.
> > Continue reading this article here.
Planned Parenthood has its tentacles all across the United States and is always trying to get something for nothing. It recently got the city of Austin, Texas, to rent it clinic space for the next 20 years at a cost to Planned Parenthood of $1 a year. Local pro-lifers are outraged.
Planned Parenthood, however, has run into trouble in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania.
> > Continue reading this article here.
By Jim Sedlak
For the first time in the history of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, one of its 56 affiliates documented that its annual income surpassed $100 million.
The affiliate is Planned Parenthood Mar Monte, headquartered in San Jose, California. In its latest official document (Federal Form 990) filed with the federal government, PPMM reported that in the fiscal year, July 1, 2016, to June 30, 2017, PPMM had a total income of $109.7 million.
> > Continue reading this article here.
We have completed our most recent review of the compensation paid to the top executive of each of the 56 affiliates of Planned Parenthood, along with its executive staff in New York City. All data for this report is from June 2017 or earlier. In June 2017, Planned Parenthood Federation of America consisted of its headquarters operation and 56 individual corporations scattered across the United States. Each of the 56 affiliates is separately incorporated, has its own board of directors, its own CEO, and files a separate Federal Form 990, which summarizes its financial data.
> > Continue reading this article here.
American Life League’s STOPP International is always extremely busy at the end of the year, and this year is no exception. It is the time that we step back from our usual travel schedule and take the time to create a “scorecard” of how the fight against Planned Parenthood has done this year. A time of research and analysis.
> > Continue reading this article here.
This week, Mississippi held a run-off election to determine who will serve as one of the US senators from the state for the next two years. The run-off was needed because neither of the two top vote getters in the general election received 50 percent of the vote.
> > Continue reading this article here.
