4um: Obama Pushes Last-Minute Rule FORCING States to Fund Planned Parenthood

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
National News
See other National News Articles
Title: Obama Pushes Last-Minute Rule FORCING States to Fund Planned Parenthood
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://louderwithcrowder.com/obama-state-fund-planned-parenthood/
Published: Dec 19, 2016
Author: aa
Post Date: 2016-12-19 08:16:49 by HAPPY2BME-4UM
Keywords: None
Views: 931
Comments: 27

The latest “achievement” to go down in Barack’s “legacy?” A rule conceived and passed in the eleventh hour which forces states to keep funneling money to abortionists…

The Obama administration has finalized a rule to stop states from withdrawing federal money from Planned Parenthood and other health clinics that provide abortions.

Under the rule, states are legally required to distribute federal funds… Republicans in Congress have repeatedly threatened to cut off Planned Parenthood clinics and in September dozens of conservative states backed proposals to defund the service, prompting the Obama administration to introduce the proposals.

The protections are due to take effect two days before Donald Trump takes office.

http://louderwithcrowder.com/obama-state-fund-planned-parenthood/
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 27.
#16. To: HAPPY2BME-4UM (#0) (Edited)
The latest “achievement” to go down in Barack’s “legacy?” A rule conceived and passed in the eleventh hour which forces states to keep funneling money to abortionists…
The Obama administration has finalized a rule to stop states from withdrawing federal money from Planned Parenthood and other health clinics that provide abortions.
Under the rule, states are legally required to distribute federal funds… Republicans in Congress have repeatedly threatened to cut off Planned Parenthood clinics and in September dozens of conservative states backed proposals to defund the service, prompting the Obama administration to introduce the proposals.
The protections are due to take effect two days before Donald Trump takes office.
http://louderwithcrowder.com/obama-state-fund-planned-parenthood/

That source references independent.co.uk ... barack-obama-abortion-funding-planned-parenthood ...
The independent.co.uk site reports:

The protections are due to take effect two days before Donald Trump takes office.
Under the rule, states are legally required to distribute federal funds for services related to contraception, fertility, pregnancy, sexually transmitted infections and breast and cervical cancer screening — regardless of whether they also perform abortions.
Federal rules already prevent the healthcare provider from spending any of the government funding – around $70m (£59m) – on abortions.
in September dozens of conservative states backed proposals to defund the service, prompting the Obama administration to introduce the proposals.
Mr Trump has previously praised Planned Parenthood, acknowledging that it “helps millions and millions of women” who go to it for health services such as breast cancer screening.

However, Planned Parenthood does not provide mammogram screenings, as many mistakenly presume. It refers its clients elsewhere for those. Reference: Post #1 of 4um Title: The moral terrorism of Planned Parenthood
That being said, the Democrat Party Platform was changed for the 2016 Presidential election to target the Hyde Amendment for repeal, which “prohibits the use of federal funds for any health benefits coverage that includes abortion.” Reference: Rep. Smith: Most Obamacare Plans Violate Hyde Amendment - cnsnews.com November 21, 2014
Clinton campaigned for the Hyde Amendment to be repealed; to use taxpayer funded Medicaid to pay for abortions. This is a 2001 example of US taxpayers being coerced to provide abortion funding internationally too:
This is Google's cache of: http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/
human-life-and-dignity/abortion/support-for-the-hyde-smith-motion.cfm.
It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on Dec 1, 2016 09:39:41 GMT.
Excerpts:

United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
Letter to Congress on the Foreign Relations Authorization Act (H.R. 1646)
May 7, 2001
Dear Member of Congress:
The Foreign Relations Authorization Act for fiscal years 2002 and 2003 (H.R. 1646) will soon come to the House floor. I urge you to support Representative Henry Hyde and Chris Smith's motion to strike the Lee amendment from this bill.
The effect of the Hyde/Smith motion will be to retain the "Mexico City" policy reinstated by President Bush. The Lee amendment reverses the policy, by allowing non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to receive U.S. funds so long as any harmful "medical" practices they promote cannot be shown to violate the host country's law or U.S. federal law.
Our foreign aid programs should not subsidize organizations that perform and promote abortions in developing nations under the guise of "family planning." Poor women in developing nations need adequate education, food, housing, and medicine for themselves and their children, so they can lead lives of full human dignity. The Mexico City policy prevents the United States from exporting and encouraging a culture of death as a supposed answer to these needs. I urge you to reject the Lee amendment. Instead, our government should respond directly to the real needs of poor women through a comprehensive poverty alleviation program and greatly increased development assistance.

Ironically, the Catholic sector has recently been compounding the econcomic duress of American females and families by clamoring for America's distressed economy to absorb not only multitudes of illegal migrants but waves of other dependents under the misattributed moniker of "refugees". Unemployment, under-employment, insufficient wages, Minimum Wage hikes which increase prices while obliterating middle class workers by withholding comparable Cost of Living increases for them, the Visa importations of foreign laborers into our workforce -- all such conditions (et al.) of Poverty/Impoverishment here are very large factors in American females resorting to abortion because they don't think they can adequately provide for a child financially. Catholic promotions of "humanitarian" foreign influxes are contradicting and undermining their stance against Abortion. Ergo, I'm imploring them, as well as the Pope, to rethink these issues and refrain from inadvertently facilitating the scourge of Abortion so.
Will try to append some more sources when I can about the complexities, nationally and internationally, of this topic's rule maneuver.

GreyLmist posted on 2016-12-22 15:38:03 ET Reply Untrace Trace Private Reply
#19. To: All (#16) (Edited)
the Democrat Party Platform was changed for the 2016 Presidential election to target the Hyde Amendment for repeal, ... Clinton campaigned for the Hyde Amendment to be repealed;

Democrats, especially, have been opposing any State or Federal restrictions at all to Abortion-on-Demand (monetarily or otherwise); even a humane Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act or a late-term/3rd trimester Abortion restriction. They insist on American taxpayer and Medicaid funding -- US foreign aid provisionings, also -- for Abortion-on-Demand centers, here and worldwide -- all the way up to the pregnancy due date and the birth-process.
Democratic Platform Topples [Party] Consensus on Abortion - dailysignal.com July 25, 2016 | [Obamacare] How [Some] Democrats [Informed or Not] Came to [Vote for] Taxpayer-Funded Abortions

One-third of Democrats, or about 23 million, are pro-life, according to Democrats for Life. ... Now, the Democrats’ party platform is calling for repeal of the [Hyde Amendment] measure ... Kristen Day, executive director for Democrats for Life of America, told The Daily Signal ...: “Most Americans don’t want public funding of abortion at home or abroad.”

On December 19, 2016, More Than 100 Members of Congress Sign a Letter Asking Trump to Repeal the Hyde Amendment - nymag.com December 20, 2016
Excerpts:

more than 100 members of Congress signed a letter asking Trump to repeal the Hyde Amendment and to abolish other restrictions on abortion care and coverage proposed in his 2018 budget request.
Trump has also promised to ... sign into [Federal] law the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which would ban abortion after 20 weeks.

politico.com copy of their letter to Trump

How the Democratic platform betrays millions of the party faithful - LA Times
Kristen Day and Charles Camosy July 25, 2016
Excerpts:

The abortion plank in the 2016 Democratic platform effectively marginalizes the voices of 21 million pro-life Democrats.
Most significantly, the platform calls for the repeal of the Hyde and Helms amendments, which prevent taxpayer funds from being used to pay for abortions.
A commitment to religious liberty in the context of abortion, which was included in the 2012 platform, has been removed.
U.S. abortion law (which permits abortion for any reason until viability, about 22 to 23 weeks) already makes many progressive countries in Europe (which set their threshold for abortion at 12 to 13 weeks) look like pro-life radicals.
In the 2008 presidential primary campaign, candidate Hillary Clinton said abortion should be safe, legal and rare. ... Yet her 2016 platform team has approved provisions that make access to abortion crucial to the well-being of every single person on the planet.
The Democratic Party's abortion stances have already caused many to leave the party, and many more will drop out because of the platform wording. The percentage of extreme abortion rights advocates is increasing in the party, but only because the total number of Democrats has shrunk to its lowest level since the Hoover administration.
Abortion is also among the reasons Democrats lost their majority in the House of Representatives. In the key states of Ohio and Pennsylvania, for example, Democrats held the majority of seats until Republicans were able to associate the Affordable Care Act with “the largest expansion of abortion since Roe v. Wade.” (In some states, Obamacare covers abortion; no states can use federal subsidies or tax credits to pay for the procedure.)
Sixty-four Democrats voted for the antiabortion Stupak amendment to the Affordable Care Act; 88% of those seats went to Republicans after Democrats were tied to ~~the assertion that~~ Obamacare funded abortion.

Obama Bars States From Denying Federal Money to Planned Parenthood - The New York Times
By JACKIE CALMES DEC. 14, 2016
Excerpts:

the Obama administration issued a final rule on Wednesday to bar states from withholding federal family-planning funds from Planned Parenthood affiliates and other health clinics that provide abortions. The measure takes effect two days before the Jan. 20 inauguration of Donald J. Trump.
The rule was proposed three months ago, when many Democrats assumed the next president would be Hillary Clinton; she presumably would have promoted the rule’s completion if it were still pending.
The new rule says that states cannot withhold money from potential recipients for any reason unrelated to their ability to provide the family-planning services.
The 30-page rule was posted on Wednesday morning on the website of the Federal Register, the government’s official journal. It will not take effect, however, until Jan. 18, 30 days after the rule appears in the paper version of the Register.

Obama Administration Moves To Protect Planned Parenthood's Federal Funding - npr.org December 14, 2016

The Department of Health and Human Services finalized a regulation Wednesday that says states that award federally funded grants for women's health programs can't discriminate against Planned Parenthood. The regulation doesn't name Planned Parenthood, but it was clear the rule was written with the organization in mind.
Planned Parenthood gets more than $500 million a year from the federal government. About 75 percent of that comes from Medicaid, for medical care provided to patients with low incomes.
The new HHS rule reinforces federal law that says the agency cannot discriminate against qualified organizations in granting federal funds.
Still, the rule could be overturned in 2017 when President-elect Donald Trump takes office. Federal lawmakers are allowed to roll back regulations under the Congressional Review Act. Or they could go through a formal rule-making process to reverse Wednesday's action.

GreyLmist posted on 2016-12-22 21:58:38 ET Reply Untrace Trace Private Reply
#20. To: All (#19)
The Abortion Policy Hillary Clinton Keeps Talking About, Explained - thinkprogress.org Jan 12, 2016

The candidate’s renewed focus on the Hyde Amendment comes just a few days after Planned Parenthood announced it will back Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary due to her record on women’s health issues. The organization plans to spend at least $20 million during this election cycle.

Hillary Clinton: You Must Pay For Abortions Or Else - thefederalist.com AUGUST 24, 2016

In past years, the Democratic platform vaguely referenced public funding, saying access to abortion should be legally permitted without regard to a woman’s “ability to pay.” The new platform approved last month in Philadelphia, however, is explicit: “We will continue to oppose—and seek to overturn—federal and state laws and policies that impede a woman’s access to abortion, including by repealing the Hyde Amendment.”
Notice that the Democratic platform states the party’s opposition not just to the Hyde Amendment, but to “federal and state laws and policies that impede a woman’s access to abortion.” The list of laws and policies the platform covers transcends Hyde and is enormous.
It would include the Helms Amendment, an even older policy dating from 1973 that prevents U.S. foreign assistance from paying for abortions performed overseas (which number in the millions). It would also include the Smith Amendment, which bars health insurance plans that cover elective abortion from participating in the Federal Employee Health Benefits program. And the Dornan Amendment, which covers congressionally appropriated funds for the District of Columbia.
That’s not to mention state abortion limits, and even laws and policies that have nothing to do with funding but only address the most basic health and safety standards for abortion facilities or even informed consent.

Hillary Clinton Vows to Repeal Hyde Amendment and Force Americans to Fund Abortions - lifenews.com SEP 30, 2016

Taxpayer-funding of abortion is not popular, even among Democrats and those who identify as pro-choice. Unfortunately, few of the major news networks have covered Clinton and the Democratic Party’s radical new shift to push taxpayer-funded abortions. Earlier this week, News Busters reported ABC, CBS and NBC did not report on the Hyde Amendment once this election year.

The Hyde Amendment Has Saved 2 Million Lives. Democrats Want To Kill It - thefederalist.com/
By Arina Grossu
SEPTEMBER 30, 2016
Today America celebrates 40 years of the Hyde Amendment, and most Americans still support its effect: preventing tax dollars from paying for abortions.

On September 30 America celebrates 40 years of the Hyde Amendment, which prevents federal funding for abortion. As a result of this law, more than 2 million Americans are alive today.
The Hyde Amendment has been renewed every year since and signed into law by both Republican and Democrat presidents. In 1980, the Supreme Court upheld the Hyde Amendment in the 5-4 Harris v. McRae landmark decision.
removing the Hyde Amendment would increase abortion by roughly 25 percent.
Americans Don’t Want to Pay for Abortions The Hyde Amendment enjoys popular support from a strong majority of Americans. A Marist poll published in July found that 62 percent of Americans oppose taxpayer funding of abortion, including 63 percent of women, 45 percent of those who say they are “pro-choice,” and 44 percent of Democrats.
Despite the positive impact and bipartisan support this law has had, Hillary Clinton has promised to make repealing the Hyde Amendment a key priority if she becomes president. This year’s Democratic Party platform for the first time ever called for its repeal.
To protect unborn children, the Hyde Amendment needs to be made permanent and be applied across the government, including to Obamacare. Congress must enact the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act (H.R. 7, S. 582) to codify this important, life-saving law. Roe v. Wade is a terrible and unjust court ruling pitted against the rights of unborn babies that unfortunately made abortion legal. However, Americans should not also have to pay for killing these babies. The Supreme Court ruled as such in 1980.

GreyLmist posted on 2016-12-22 23:48:42 ET Reply Untrace Trace Private Reply
#22. To: GreyLmist (#20) (Edited)
Americans Don’t Want to Pay for Abortions The Hyde Amendment enjoys popular support from a strong majority of Americans. A Marist poll published in July found that 62 percent of Americans oppose taxpayer funding of abortion, including 63 percent of women, 45 percent of those who say they are “pro-choice,” and 44 percent of Democrats.
Despite the positive impact and bipartisan support this law has had, Hillary Clinton has promised to make repealing the Hyde Amendment a key priority if she becomes president. This year’s Democratic Party platform for the first time ever called for its repeal.
To protect unborn children, the Hyde Amendment needs to be made permanent and be applied across the government, including to Obamacare. Congress must enact the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act (H.R. 7, S. 582) to codify this important, life-saving law.

The people are alleged to also be the government. Christians are alleged to be against funding "abortion" according to the poll mentioned. The notion that the people can rely upon the murderous criminals in D.C. to stop murdering is insanity and I think these so-called Christians know it but are not true believers but pretenders without a backbone.
I think the Bible describes the situation when it states: the salt has lost its savor. Real Christians wouldn't fund 99% of D.C.'s bullshit. Real Christians would quit whining and stop waiting for the deviants in D.C. to do what real Christians should be doing. And that is stop funding the FEDS.

noone222 posted on 2016-12-23 6:30:40 ET Reply Untrace Trace Private Reply
#24. To: noone222 (#22) (Edited)
I think the Bible describes the situation when it states: the salt has lost its savor. Real Christians wouldn't fund 99% of D.C.'s bullshit. Real Christians would quit whining and stop waiting for the deviants in D.C. to do what real Christians should be doing. And that is stop funding the FEDS.

Well, some Christians feel doctrinally obligated to render unto "Seizer" and likewise to Romans 13: Submission to Governing Authorities. Christians or not, it's mostly not permissable in this country for American adults to work "off the tax grid" -- because they're not illegal aliens, I guess. So, I'd rather not fault them much for being wary of risking unemployability, asset seizure, prison and whatnot. As a Christian, oughtn't you to be a bit more charitable towards them about that troubling situation? I suspect it's not like many have pondered the 2nd Amendment regarding well-trained Militias ... or even the establishing of a voluntary work-club project using an alternate currency system to ease their expenses and also reduce the levels of their extracted funds to D.C. : )

GreyLmist posted on 2016-12-23 8:11:31 ET Reply Untrace Trace Private Reply
#27. To: GreyLmist (#24)
wow! thank you for all the above information and links. am saving the page to go back and study when my computer is running more smoothly. keep up the good work, please, to save the children.
some Christians feel doctrinally obligated to render unto "Seizer" and likewise to Romans 13: Submission to Governing Authorities.
"Seizer"...that's funny!!
if you know any of those Christians, please save this website's content on Romans 13, and share it with them. this website has been under attack...it may still be for all i know...i think they are deemed "extremists" on the adl website...so please save. here's their 2-Minute Rebuttal to Romans 13. there are several good studies on the subject at this link:

The Two Minute Rebuttal
Romans 13
Let's say Apostle Paul was telling the Church, "Be subject to the secular government," which at that time was the Roman Empire. And he was also saying, "Rome is not a terror to good works, but to the evil. The Roman centurion does not swing his sword in vain. Therefore, do good and you shall have praise of the same."
I pose only one question, Why was Apostle Paul beheaded by a Roman Centurion if he was preaching, "Be subject to Rome"? The Roman government would have no cause to behead him.
On the other hand, if Paul was beheaded because he was an "evildoer," why is an "evildoer" writing in our Holy Book? We better purge him out of there. We better clean up the Holy Scriptures. We better remove Romans 13 because it was written by an "evildoer."
No, I don't believe for a minute that Paul was telling the Church to be subject to the Roman Empire. Nor do I believe Paul was an evildoer. Paul was beheaded for promoting a rival government. It has to be. The secular authorities killed him because he was establishing another government, the Kingdom of Heaven.
Paul would be a hypocrite if he were saying to obey the secular authorities in Romans 13. It is inconsistent with his other writings. In Romans 12, Paul tells us, "do not be conformed to this world" (Romans 12:2). Obeying the secular authorities certainly means conforming to the world. In 2 Corinthians, Chapter 6:14-17, Paul says, "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers, for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? . . . Come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you." We cannot cut our ties with the world and still be subject to them. "We ought to obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29).
What is the study of the Holy Bible from beginning to end? It is God's people rebelling against Him and seeking to be like the Kingdoms of this world. Again and again, they are brought into harsh slavery because of their disobedience. Chasing after the Kingdoms of this world leads to death. Only the Kingdom of Heaven is an everlasting government.
Christ's government is here right now. It is His government that every soul is to be subject to. Turn away from sin and come out from the governments of the world. "Be subject unto the higher powers within Ecclesia, within Christ's government." (See Hebrews 13:7 and 13:17).

http://romans13.embassyofheaven.com/2minute.php
here's something else to think about....
Jesus on paying "Seizer":
Mark 12:17 And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's. And they marvelled at him.

http://biblehub.com/mark/12-17.htm
Psalm 14:1 A Psalm of David. The earth is the LORD'S, and the fulness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein. [so where does that leave Seizer?]
http://biblehub.com/psalms/24-1.htm
The King of the Universe on whether His children should pay taxes to Seizer:
Matthew 17: 24And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? 25He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? 26Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free.
http://biblehub.com/kjv/matthew/17.htm
John 10:8 All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers:....
http://biblehub.com/john/10-8.htm
John 10:10 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.
http://biblehub.com/john/10-10.htm

AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt posted on 2016-12-24 10:55:19 ET Reply Untrace Trace Private Reply
Replies to Comment # 27.
There are no replies to Comment # 27.

End Trace Mode for Comment # 27.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

Freedom4um