January 7th, 2010
10:45 AM ET
10 years ago

Abortion stops planned at Democratic offices

Washington (CNN) - An influential conservative women's organization is planning a press tour in three Rust Belt states next week in an effort to urge a dozen-plus House Democrats to continue supporting the prohibition of federal funds for abortion in the health care reform legislation.

The Susan B. Anthony List will announce Thursday afternoon its plan to hold the events at the district offices of 13 House Democrats in Indiana, Ohio and Pennsylvania, CNN has learned. All of the Democrats voted in favor of an amendment authored by Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Michigan, that forbids the use federal funds for abortion in the House version of the health care bill. The amendment was approved by the House, but a similar measure failed in the Senate.

"On behalf of millions of pro-life Americans, we urge pro-life Democrats in the House to stand firm, to respect the consciences of taxpayers and oppose health care reform legislation that funds abortion on-demand," former Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, R-Colorado, will say in a statement that accompanies details of the tour. Musgrave serves as the director of the SBA List's Votes Have Consequences Project.

The events will be held at the offices of Rep. Jason Altmire of Pennsylvania, Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper of Pennsylvania, Rep. Mike Doyle of Pennsylvania, Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania, Rep. Tim Ryan of Ohio, Rep. John Boccieri of Ohio, Rep. Steve Driehaus of Ohio, Rep. Marcy Kaptur of Ohio, Rep. Zack Space of Ohio, Rep Charlie Wilson of Ohio, Rep. Joe Donnelly of Indiana, Rep. Brad Ellsworth of Indiana and Rep. Baron Hill of Indiana.

A handful of other anti-abortion rights organizations are joining SBA List in this campaign including Focus on the Family, Family Research Council, 40 Days for Life, Concerned Women for America, Eagle Forum and Students for Life of America.

An organizer stressed that the events are being organized to thank the Democrats for supporting the abortion funding restriction and urge them to continue to do so.


Filed under: Abortion
soundoff (29 Responses)
  1. GI Joe

    Maybe the wingnuts will be happy when the POPE rules the USA.

    January 7, 2010 11:15 am at 11:15 am |
  2. ThinkAgain

    I heard Dick Armey yesterday on NPR going on about how Conservatives respect the rights of the individual more than Liberals do.

    Yet when it comes to a woman's body, they are completely intrusive.

    I also encourage these protestors to check their current private medical insurance policy and if it covers abortion, then they should discontinue their coverage immediately (because they are funding abortion).

    January 7, 2010 11:19 am at 11:19 am |
  3. ThinkAgain

    Roe v Wade is the law of the land, as it should be.

    If Conservatives really want to do something about unwanted pregnancies, they should push for and fully fund contraceptives.

    January 7, 2010 11:20 am at 11:20 am |
  4. Billy J..Texas..

    So rich women and families can control their wealth and destinies after making a common mistake (albeit a stupid one) but poor people just keep poppin' em out. ............ whatever ................... just pass this thing so we can work on the economy, and tweak health care later after everyone realizes that it IS saving us money and keeping us healthier.

    January 7, 2010 11:21 am at 11:21 am |
  5. If you want something ruined, put a republican in charge

    In the meantime, everyone else should show up at republican offices protesting republican wars, unnecessary deaths of hundreds of thousand of civilians and 4500 troops, and the unwillingness of republicans to help the 45,000 each year who die without health insurance or affordable health care.

    January 7, 2010 11:22 am at 11:22 am |
  6. Paul from Phoenix

    How about respecting the rights of taxpayers who don't support abortion?

    WHy should I pay for your abortion? Like it or not, an abortion is an ELECTIVE surgery. Pro-CHoice proponents can not deny this.

    So, since abortion is elective, taxpayers should not have to foot the bill.

    January 7, 2010 11:31 am at 11:31 am |
  7. Daisy in AZ

    Religious beliefs should NOT influence laws. While I do not feel that abortions is the right thing to do in most cases I do not think that ONE relgions beliefs should influnce laws or try and take away womens rights. Making sure federal funds are not used for abortions is against the Constitution...you know the document our country was founded on? This argument is based not on scientific evidence that abortions are harmful but soley the Christian Bible, which BTW does not ever mention abortion or say that it is wrong. The Bible does state, however, that murder is wrong, yet most Christians have no problem sending their kids off to war to MURDER! NO WHERE in the Bible does it say killing someone for your country is acceptable...it says pure and simple DO NOT KILL. Funny the hypocrsy of these abortion activists...don't kill babies...wait until they are grown so we can send them to KILL others in War. Maybe they we would be more effective in convincing people about the "sanctity of life" if they protested Wars just as often.

    January 7, 2010 11:32 am at 11:32 am |
  8. The Root Word of Progressive is Progress

    "The Susan B. Anthony List "??? I think it's terrible that these people would co-opt the name of one of the hardest fighters for women's rights in the history of this country to futher their agenda to set BACK women's rights. They should be ashamed! I'm sure Susan B. Anthony is turning in her grave.

    January 7, 2010 11:33 am at 11:33 am |
  9. Lori in St Pete

    If these groups cared as much for the post-born as they do for the pre-born, we could solve such problems as lack of insurance, child abuse, failing schools, drug/alcohol abuse, and homelessness just to name a few.

    January 7, 2010 11:36 am at 11:36 am |
  10. Anonymous

    I just love the irony of pro-life, anti-healthcare-reform Americans. After all, every child has an unalienable right to be born into an indifferent society that will ignore his/her cries for medicine, surgeries and treatment. All hail the infinite wisdom of God & Profit!

    January 7, 2010 11:36 am at 11:36 am |
  11. Minnesotan

    Pro-lifers scare me worse than anything. They're willing to bomb clinics and kill people to 'protect life.' How insane is that?

    January 7, 2010 11:36 am at 11:36 am |
  12. Michelle

    I'm for anything SBA, CWA, and FRC are against. Where can I sign up for an elective abortion?

    January 7, 2010 11:39 am at 11:39 am |
  13. Tia Lively

    Save your time and energies, ladies. Those democraps don't care. After all, abortion is just a way to reduce the carbon footprint. We know from the liberals that there are too many people in the US already.

    January 7, 2010 11:48 am at 11:48 am |
  14. Mike

    Interesting that this group would name itself after a person pushing for women's rights and then try to limit other women's rights.

    January 7, 2010 11:53 am at 11:53 am |
  15. Dean

    This from the same people who don't want goverment messing with their healthcare.

    January 7, 2010 11:58 am at 11:58 am |
  16. VON BISMARK -Vienna

    I thought the GOP preahes freedom. It may be freedom that doesn't include choice.
    Let's get this clear: no THOU SHALT NOT is more imperative than the other.Are GOPers guilty of any other one than what they say the selected cases of abortion stand for?

    TO THYSELF BE TRUE!

    January 7, 2010 12:00 pm at 12:00 pm |
  17. NVa Native

    It is annoying that people want to impose their religious beliefs on other people, especially something so personal and intimate as the deliberation of abortion. What don't these radical finatics understand about the primary American value of "seperation of church and state"?

    January 7, 2010 12:01 pm at 12:01 pm |
  18. B. Churchill

    Opposed to abortion? Don't have one – what's so hard to figure out about that? What's that you say? The righteousness of your position empowers you to force it on me and my family? And let me guess – you don't exactly approve of the Taliban, of Jihadis, or Hamas, or...

    January 7, 2010 12:05 pm at 12:05 pm |
  19. jules sand-perkins

    If former Rep. Marilyn Musgrave is opposed to abortion, I completely agree with her that under no circumstances whatsoever should she required to undergo such an invasive and private procedure.
    Her friends on the SBA List, as well, should be exempt from the threat of this operation, regardless of the government agaency wishing to force them to subnit to it, no matter what they may have done to deserve it.

    January 7, 2010 12:09 pm at 12:09 pm |
  20. Enough

    Abortion has NO place in politics.............period. Separation of Church and state, and separation of personal matters too!

    January 7, 2010 12:11 pm at 12:11 pm |
  21. Chipster

    If this works, I guess a lot of us need to make this sort of appeal for our representatives "to respect the consciences of taxpayers and oppose" invading nations that have not attacked us, funding healthcare for elected officials, funding religious organizations that use government funds to promote their religion, and a long list of other items that I don't have time or space to list.

    This is wonderful! I had no idea that we could pick and choose what we didn't want to pay for! We'll whittle down that deficit in no time!

    January 7, 2010 12:11 pm at 12:11 pm |
  22. A. Goodwin

    I think the pro-life movement goes to far. What about those women who's health is at jeopardy to carry a baby? Dont get me wrong – I think any woman who has an unwanted pregnancy should consider anything and everything (adoption) before terminating a pregnancy. But what about those woman who's health is at risk? Is it OK to let the mother die to save the baby?

    January 7, 2010 12:12 pm at 12:12 pm |
  23. American

    Rep. Musgrave speaks such nonsense with her rhetoric "on-demand" as if talking points would convey any substance on this issue. Unbelievable.

    Rep. Stupack's amendment goes too far into private plans, while Sen. Nelson's version seems more reasonable to strengthen the Hyde amendment to prevent federal funding.

    January 7, 2010 12:14 pm at 12:14 pm |
  24. S Callahan God help America!

    Any health care bill passed without the stipulation of NO FEDERAL funds supporting abortion (inclusive of any plans) would be deception. This was a media made verbal promise from the President of the United States. His creditbility stands on it...and this IS a very important issue despite any spin the media may want to give it. You are fighting for the life of this nation...it's worth the battle.

    January 7, 2010 12:16 pm at 12:16 pm |
  25. gt

    thank you bart stupak....

    January 7, 2010 12:19 pm at 12:19 pm |
1 2