I guess Lizzie Tudor and Looney Cooney won't be voting for Gore. Gore's got more flip flops than a fish in the bottom of the boat. The record speaks for itself:
> Date: July 27, 2000
> In recent days, various supporters of Al Gore have characterized Congressman Dick Cheney's congressional voting record on abortion-related issues as extreme or outside the mainstream. The charge of extremism is odd,
> considering that when Gore and Cheney served together in the House their voting records on abortion were nearly identical.
>
> Gore and Cheney served together in the House for six years (1979-84).During that six-year period, there were 17 roll calls on the House floor on significant abortion-related issues. On three of those roll calls, either
> Gore or Cheney was absent. On the 14 roll calls for which both were present,they voted the same 13 times. The only exception was the November 15, 1983 vote on the "Equal Rights Amendment," which Gore supported and Cheney
> opposed.(1)
>
> If the ERA vote is excluded from the calculation, Gore and Cheney vote identically on every significant abortion-related issue to reach the House floor during the six years they served together.
>
> Specifically, both men consistently supported the Hyde Amendment and other similar amendments to prohibit federal funding of abortion, except to save the life of the mother. Both men voted against proposals to approve federal
funding of abortion in additional circumstances, for example in cases or rape and incest.
> According to some press reports, some Gore supporters have highlighted a vote by Cheney in support of a version of the Hyde Amendment adopted on September 22, 1983, which contained no life-of-mother exception. Gore also voted for
that amendment. It is noteworthy that it was the pro-abortion side that in effect forced the House to vote on this atypical version of the Hyde Amendment. Pro-abortion House members blocked the traditional Hyde Amendment by raising a point of order that the life-of-mother exception itself violated the House rule against "legislation on an appropriations bill," and this point of order was upheld. The purpose of the pro-abortion lawmakers was to force Hyde to offer the amendment in a no-exceptions form (not subject to a point of order), which they thought would be easier to defeat. After the no-exception version was offered on Hyde's behalf by Rep. Silvio Conte (R-Ma.), Hyde took the floor to assure his colleagues that the life-of-mother
exception would be restored in a subsequent conference committee, and that is what occurred.(2) (3) (4)
>
> Both men voted to ban federal funding of non-therapeutic experimentation "on a living human fetus or infant, whether before or after induced abortion"
> (Sept. 30, 1982).
>
> On June 26, 1984, both Cheney and Gore voted in favor of the Siljander Amendment, to amend a federal civil rights bill to say that "the term 'person' shall include unborn children from the moment of conception."(House
> roll call 269, CQ roll call no. 242) In more recent years, Gore has offered three different "explanations" of this vote, each inconsistent with the others and each misleading. Most recently, on NBC Meet the Press on July
16, 2000, Gore said his vote for the Siljander Amendment "was a very odd procedural vote." That statement was false. There was nothing "procedural" about the vote. It was a simple up-and-down vote on a one-sentence
amendment, and Gore voted to adopt it. (It was defeated.) Further details on this matter are presented in "Gore Can't Get His Story Straight on 1984 Vote to Define Unborn Children As 'Persons' From Conception," November 1999 National Right to Life News, available on the internet at
> nrlc.org.
>
> 1. The House leadership brought the ERA to the floor under "suspension of the rules," which precluded consideration of any amendments, including an "abortion-neutralization" amendment to prevent the ERA from being used as a pro-abortion legal weapon, supported by NRLC, the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, and others. In a subsequent letter to constituents,Cheney expressed support for the abortion-neutral amendment, and he noted his dissatisfaction with the no-amendments procedure. The objections expressed in 1983 by NRLC, NCCB, and Cheney have been amply validated by subsequent events, such as the unanimous 1998 ruling by the New Mexico Supreme Court that the state's ERA requires tax-funded elective abortion.(http://lw.bna.com/lw/19990209/239.htm)
>
> 2. Here is the way this episode was described in the Public Affairs Newsletter of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America: "The [no-exceptions] amendment was offered shortly after pro-choice Members led by Rep. Les AuCoin (D-OR) had raised a "point of order' against the FY 83'Hyde Amendment' language (with a 'life endangerment exception'), as constituting legislation on an appropriations bill. The amendment was stuck from the
bill through the AuCoin 'point of order.' Anti-choice Members, however, then offered a rider imposing a total funding ban, which was 'in order' because it
was not technically considered 'legislation.' . . . Throughout the 30-minute debate, anti-choice Members, led by Rep. Henry Hyde (R-IL), insisted that they planned ultimately to 'recede to the Senate' by agreeing to the 'life endangerment' exception."
>
> 3. Hyde said on the House floor, "Now I want the protection of the life of the mother in there. The gentleman from Oregon [Mr. AuCOIN] does not. And
that is why it was stricken. But I want to suggest to my colleagues that it will be restored in the conference." [Congressional Record, Sept. 22, 1983,> page H7318.]
>
> 4. On two other occasions, under similar circumstances, both Gore and Cheney voted for no-exceptions bans on coverage of abortions in the Federal Employees Health Benefits program. The final, enacted version of that ban
> also contained the life-of-mother exception.
>
> Comparison Chart by Vote, Congressman Cheney, Congressman Gore
> |
