Senate Fails to Pass Born-Alive Bill

[redleghunter]

By a vote of 53-44, the Senate has failed to pass the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, which would have required doctors to provide medical care to infants born alive after an attempted abortion procedure. The bill — sponsored by Senator Ben Sasse (R., Neb.) and cosponsored by 49 of his fellow Republican senators — needed 60 votes to overcome the legislative filibuster.

Just three Democratic senators crossed the aisle to vote with Republicans in favor of the legislation: Bob Casey Jr. (Pa.), Joe Manchin (W.Va.), and Doug Jones (Ala.).


All six of the Democratic senators currently running for the 2020 presidential nomination voted against the bill: Cory Booker (N.J.), Sherrod Brown (Ohio), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Kamala Harris (Calif.), Amy Klobuchar (Minn.), and Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), along with Independent Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

Three Republican senators did not vote on the bill: Kevin Cramer (N.D.), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), and Tim Scott (S.C.). According to their communications directors, both Cramer and Scott missed the vote due to flight delays.

Born-Alive Bill Fails to Pass Senate | National Review

 

[TuxAme]

Reason #666 why I wouldn't touch the democratic party with a 35 1/2 foot pole.

 

[tulc]

....annnnd the Republicans can once again use abortion to keep their base in lock step and vote as they're told to vote. Plus? As a bonus, they get to (as usual) blame it all on the Democratic Party. I see that it's still true what they say: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." They really know how to play that portion of their base don't they?
tulc(now comes the obligatory hand wringing and finger pointing from the Republican leadership)

 

[redleghunter]

....annnnd the Republicans can once again use abortion to keep their base in lock step and vote as they're told to vote. Plus? As a bonus, they get to (as usual) blame it all on the Democratic Party. I see that it's still true what they say: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." They really know how to play that portion of their base don't they?
tulc(now comes the obligatory hand wringing and finger pointing from the Republican leadership)

Interesting observation.

Other than three Democrats the party just voted for infanticide.

 

[tulc]

Interesting observation.

Other than three Democrats the party just voted for infanticide.

For a different perspective on this:
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-poli...live-abortion-survivors-protection-2019-sasse

Sasse says the legislation is necessary to protect newborn babies — “it’s cowardly for a politician to say they’ll fight for the little guy but only if the little guy isn’t an actual seven-pound baby who’s fighting for life,” he said in a statement earlier this month. The senator has not responded to Vox’s request for comment.

But reproductive rights and physicians’ groups say the bill could criminalize doctors and is unnecessary since laws already exist to protect an infant in the extremely unlikely scenario of a birth after an abortion attempt. “The bill maligns and vilifies providers and patients to push a false narrative about abortion later in pregnancy,” Dr. Kristyn Brandi, a board member of Physicians for Reproductive Health, told Vox in an email.

By putting up the bill, Sasse and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell are focusing attention on an aspect of the abortion debate they may see as a wedge issue for some voters: abortions very late in pregnancy.

I've said it before and will continue to say it: No political party in the US is a more against banning abortion then the Republican Party leadership. Simply because once abortion is no longer available to whip the party base into an unthinking frenzy, the Republicans will cease to exist as a major political party in America.
tulc(it's actually painfully obvious once people stop listening to the abortion bell the Republicans ring all the time to keep their base in line)

 

[Arcangl86]

Interesting observation.

Other than three Democrats the party just voted for infanticide.

Considering that there is not a single place in this country where infanticide is legal and this vote didn't and couldn't change that, no they didn't.

 

[Arcangl86]

....annnnd the Republicans can once again use abortion to keep their base in lock step and vote as they're told to vote. Plus? As a bonus, they get to (as usual) blame it all on the Democratic Party. I see that it's still true what they say: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." They really know how to play that portion of their base don't they?
tulc(now comes the obligatory hand wringing and finger pointing from the Republican leadership)

Didn't Leader McConnell say recently that he doesn't like doing show votes?

 

[amariselle]

Considering that there is not a single place in this country where infanticide is legal and this vote didn't and couldn't change that, no they didn't.

As this bill specifically pertained to providing medical care for babies born alive after a failed abortion procedure, yes this vote could have prevented infanticide.

Infanticide: “the crime of killing a child within a year of birth.”

And it should also be noted (and no one has any excuse to say otherwise), even before birth, that baby is a human being with a right to live. We are long past any time where we can argue the “clump of cells” theory.

 

[redleghunter]

Considering that there is not a single place in this country where infanticide is legal and this vote didn't and couldn't change that, no they didn't.

The legislation calls for medical professionals to administer the same medical care to born alive babies from abortion as they do live births.

The vast majority of Democrats voted against this. They sided with infanticide.

 

[Arcangl86]

The legislation calls for medical professionals to administer the same medical care to born alive babies from abortion as they do live births.

The vast majority of Democrats voted against this. They sided with infanticide.

The Constitution does not empower Congress to regulate the medical profession anywhere but DC.

 

[redleghunter]

The Constitution does not empower Congress to regulate the medical profession anywhere but DC.

The President signs legislation into law and the new law is then enforced.

 

[Arcangl86]

The President signs legislation into law and the new law is then enforced.

Uh, no. Congress is only given the power to pass laws in certain areas. I will admit over the centuries that the courts have defined the scope of the enumerated powers pretty broadly. That being said though, it is pretty clear that general criminal law or the regulation of the professions in the several states is not among them.

 

[redleghunter]

Uh, no. Congress is only given the power to pass laws in certain areas. I will admit over the centuries that the courts have defined the scope of the enumerated powers pretty broadly. That being said though, it is pretty clear that general criminal law or the regulation of the professions in the several states is not among them.

The only coherent defense for those who opposed the law would be the following:

“Of course medical professionals would never kill a baby in any cases even a botched abortion.”

Then state the law already protects live birth US citizens.

But they did not. They bowed to the altar of abortion. They voted against this legislation and gave the reason as this is women’s healthcare.

You really don’t have to defend the indefensible. They voted for infanticide.

 

[redleghunter]

Uh, no. Congress is only given the power to pass laws in certain areas. I will admit over the centuries that the courts have defined the scope of the enumerated powers pretty broadly. That being said though, it is pretty clear that general criminal law or the regulation of the professions in the several states is not among them.

The only coherent defense for those who opposed the law would be the following:

“Of course medical professionals would never kill a baby in any cases even a botched abortion.”

Then state the law already protects live birth US citizens.

But they did not. They bowed to the altar of abortion. They voted against this legislation and gave the reason as this is women’s healthcare.

You really don’t have to defend the indefensible. They voted for infanticide.

 

[redleghunter]

For a different perspective on this:
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-poli...live-abortion-survivors-protection-2019-sasse

I've said it before and will continue to say it: No political party in the US is a more against banning abortion then the Republican Party leadership. Simply because once abortion is no longer available to whip the party base into an unthinking frenzy, the Republicans will cease to exist as a major political party in America.
tulc(it's actually painfully obvious once people stop listening to the abortion bell the Republicans ring all the time to keep their base in line)

Maybe the article was not crystal clear.

These are live births due to botched abortions. So to either assist in the death of the child or let them die on their own is in fact the definition of infanticide.

I am appalled anyone is actually trying to defend this.

 

[Gigimo]

I am appalled anyone is actually trying to defend this.

Political ideology makes for strange bedfellows.

 

[EpiscipalMe]

There is already federal law on the books protecting infant survivors of abortion:
Born-Alive Infants Protection Act - Wikipedia

This new bill was pure political posturing.

 

[tulc]

There is already federal law on the books protecting infant survivors of abortion:
Born-Alive Infants Protection Act - Wikipedia

This new bill was pure political posturing.

Just one more thing for Republicans to point at to get their base into lockstep so they'll vote for whom ever they tell them to vote for. All with no intention of ever ending abortion in America.
tulc(just thought that should be pointed out)

 

[TuxAme]

Maybe the article was not crystal clear.

These are live births due to botched abortions. So to either assist in the death of the child or let them die on their own is in fact the definition of infanticide.

I am appalled anyone is actually trying to defend this.

Don't be. These are the people who say that someone should have the right to kill their offspring at any point during pregnancy. We can't be surprised when they still want the child to die when it survives the assassination attempt.

 

[redleghunter]

Don't be. These are the people who say that someone should have the right to kill their offspring at any point during pregnancy. We can't be surprised when they still want the child to die when it survives the assassination attempt.

I've asked questions in the past on threads "what if the child is born alive during an abortion?" I was always given stern answers that (1) such is not an abortion (2) at that point it is a live birth and the child has constitutional protections as a citizen. Since the NY and VA laws/bills those positions have fell silent and now it is just a matter of "women's health and choice."