House votes to defund Planned Parenthood 241-187

Q

QuickSilver

SF VIP
Location
Midwest
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2015/09/house-votes-defund-planned-parenthood

The House on Friday voted 241-to-187 to strip Planned Parenthood of some $500 million in federal family planning funds for a year. The move is intended to keep the public eye on allegations of illegal behavior by Planned Parenthood staffers but remove the possibility of a government shutdown by conservatives bent on defunding the organization.
The vote followed several grueling hearings held by the House Judiciary Committee into the undercover sting videos that allegedly show Planned Parenthood employees selling fetal parts, which would be a violation of federal law. The organization has denied the allegations, and state after state investigating the videos, which are heavily edited, has been found no evidence of wrongdoing. As the October 1 deadline for funding the government approaches, however, several conservative members of Congress, including presidential hopeful Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), threatened to block any government funding bill that provided Medicaid or family planning dollars to Planned Parenthood. But it remains to be seen if this latest vote will satisfy conservative elements of the party.
Planned Parenthood is barred by law from using federal funds to provide abortions. The $500 million or so it receives each year from the government allows the group to provide family planning and other reproductive health services to mostly poor women on Medicaid. Ahead of the vote, conservative activists and lawmakers circulated a list of thousands of other family planning providers that could replace Planned Parenthood for the thousands of poor women who use its services. There is ample evidence to suggest that these alternatives to Planned Parenthood do not have the capacity to treat the group's patients.
 

So.... If the PP is barred by law from using federal funds to provide abortions (the Hyde Amendment)... Why are Republicans trying to defund the other services it provides? This is just another attack on women... particularly POOR women. If you stop access to birth control... doesn't it make there will be more unplanned pregnancies.. and MORE abortions? I really don't get that convoluted reasoning. Not to mention if cancer screenings, and STD treatments are defunded poor women will show up in emergency rooms with advanced diseases, which will cost MORE to treat. More twisted reasoning... OR... does the GOP REALLY hate women? Sure sounds like it..
 
While there was a Democrat controlled congress they should have changed the rules to cover what they want to do and now there would be no argument at all. And if the Republicans want it changed back, that would be their opportunity now. But it seems they are just asking folks to keep to the written promises for a while.

Just how expensive is birth control these days? I remember when a teen that many could purchase it with no problems at all. Maybe it is just some of the more costly stuff that is being spoken of.

Sounds like it is just should have changed the rules when they could.
 

Yes... the GOP should have changed the rules when they gained control of the Senate last year. But they didn't and they won't. This bill will now go to the Senate for almost certain defeat with a filibuster by the Democratic minority. The bill will not even reach the Presidents desk. Republicans will not be able to muster the 60 votes it needs to beat the filibuster let alone the 67 votes it would need to defeat a Presidential veto. The bill is dead, but hopefully this vote in the house will satisfy the radical House republicans.
 
Well, if it is so simple, why the big fuss in the first place. Let the Congress do its job and let the government move on as it should.
 
So what was the point of having that vote in the first place? Well... let me tell you... To allow the House Representatives up for re-election next year to go on record as having voted to defund PP..and to satisfy their base. It was a purely symbolic vote and a waste of time and taxpayer money. The GOP will do anything to pander.. it's pathetic.
 
Well, then that sounds just like politics to me and others. I am sure the Democrats also do the same nonsense in their fiddling with the rules. Look how the Obama care got through in its big vote in Congress. It failed to have a passing vote so the vote was held open while the Democrats kept pulling more folks in to the winning side. I think it was some late in the evening time before they finally had changed enough votes to support Obama care. Politics happens for both parties. I would like to see all that party voting removed by eliminating party from the Congress itself. Let it all happen on votes by the persons involved, not by parties. Like the Constitution describes our government.
 
Arkansas, Alabama, and are three of the states that shut off state spending for PP. In each of those three states, PP filed suit against the state. A Federal judge ruled this past week that Arkansas has to reinstate the funding. It is assumed that both Ala and La will also be required to. It's difficult to justify to the courts defunding PP, based on simply some evangelical platform. So far, PP has not been found guilty of doing anything illegal.
 
QuickSilver said:
Yes... the GOP should have changed the rules when they gained control of the Senate last year. But they didn't and they won't. This bill will now go to the Senate for almost certain defeat with a filibuster by the Democratic minority. The bill will not even reach the Presidents desk. Republicans will not be able to muster the 60 votes it needs to beat the filibuster let alone the 67 votes it would need to defeat a Presidential veto. The bill is dead, but hopefully this vote in the house will satisfy the radical House republicans.
Click to expand...

Actually the Republicans did not gain control of Congress last year. They won the elections but control came about sometime in January of this year.
 
You are just SOOO smart Bob... They won the elections and thus control LAST year... they were instated in January of this year... got another hair to split?
 
Hair splitting? Not so. The older Congress was still officially in charge till after Jan 1st sometime, when the new Congress got seated officially. Facts, not splitting hairs at all.
 
Bob.... THIS is SEPTEMBER... The NEW Republican majority was sworn in in January.. That's, according to my count, NINE months ago... They could have changed the filibuster rule the day after they were sworn in...in January, NINE months ago.. BUT they didn't. And they WON'T.. why? because they know they will not have majority control in the Senate forever, and they like the idea of being able to filibuster and require a super majority for every piece of legislation. The Dems are using it now much to the discomfort of Republicans... BUT Republicans could have changed the rule nine months ago.
 
I find it curious that those fringe elements of the Republican Party, which espouse a return to "America The Great" philosophy, somehow fail to perceive that the very respect they deem so important -globally speaking, is automatically forfeit when their behaviour is seen as ludicrous by the majority of developed nations. Derision is not conducive to maintaining either respect or power. Sad to see a great nation reduced to this. The American people deserve better.
 
Shalimar said:
I find it curious that those fringe elements of the Republican Party, which espouse a return to "America The Great" philosophy, somehow fail to perceive that the very respect they deem so important -globally speaking, is automatically forfeit when their behaviour is seen as ludicrous by the majority of developed nations. Derision is not conducive to maintaining either respect or power. Sad to see a great nation reduced to this. The American people deserve better.
Click to expand...

How true... Republicans knew that the House passing a bill to defund Planned Parenthood was simply symbolic and had no chance of becoming law. but they did it anyway in order to appease their base. Now WHY this base doesn't understand that it was only a symbolic vote... and why it would make them happy is beyond me.
 
Shalimar said:
I find it curious that those fringe elements of the Republican Party, which espouse a return to "America The Great" philosophy, somehow fail to perceive that the very respect they deem so important -globally speaking, is automatically forfeit when their behaviour is seen as ludicrous by the majority of developed nations. Derision is not conducive to maintaining either respect or power. Sad to see a great nation reduced to this. The American people deserve better.
Click to expand...

Have you taken time to read the post I put up recently? Apparently 62 have so far. It points out why the US government is different from those so called developed nations that are doing somewhat poorer than the US when measuring life styles and amounts of housing and such for the people themselves. Not at all sure why you would try to say our government is no good. Over 200 years on the present design and it is still solid and doing well, except in the recent years as our debt went from 7.7 trillion under Bush to now 18 trillion under Obama. We are looking to another election and hope to replace our current bad President with a more realistic one of either major political party. We need a real person who can realize that our debts just can not keep on getting bigger each year.

Your idea of the US needing to be like those other countries around the world makes no sense that I can see. They have been broke for so long it is deplorable to use them as examples of better governments. Over 200 years of good and growing in the US is nothing to be ashamed of and it is certainly been magnet to millions of people from the so called better governments that wanted to come here for better times. My parents from England for my mothers family and from Germany for my fathers family.

Read this file and see the differences between other governments and the US governments. We do not have a setup where one group can just out vote the other group and they no longer have any say in what goes on. Some countries live under that type of majority rules idea but the US does not.

Democracy and Republic are different than Democrats and Republicans - thankfully.

https://www.seniorforums.com/showth...ent-than-Democrats-and-Republicans-thankfully
 
The GOP doesn't hate women exactly. As long as they only have lawfully wedded procreation. Birth control means women have the right to be cheap hussies without punishment. Then again prohibiting access to birth control means that women the GOP don't cater to might start having higher birth rates from lack of choice. Maybe they haven't considered that consequence. It's just ridiculous, Roe v. Wade passed in 1972. And they've been fighting it ever since.
 
What is so expensive about birth control that we need the government to pay the bills. There are some not so expensive ways that I remember from my earlier days. Also some methods that my wife had used after we had our son and daughter. Never heard her complain about the cost and only some real poor person would. Seems like there would have been working systems for those very poor folks. With out expensive government agencies needed. But many folks like to see big government agencies.
 
AZ Jim said:
GOP= Clearly anti woman. My Gawd how obviously so....
Click to expand...

Really not a true comment Jim. We have a lot of women in the GOP and they all seem to be quite reasonable to me. I think enough to give the guys a bad time if out of control.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top