Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (13601)	5/16/2001 1:33:55 PM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 82486

Update-- House Passes Curb to Abortion Aid By Juliet Eilperin Washington Post Staff Writer Wednesday, May 16, 2001; 12:56 PM The House engaged in a heated debate this morning before voting by a narrow margin to to restore President Bush's ban on foreign aid to groups offering abortion counseling or services. Earlier this month a House committee had overturned such restrictions, which President Bush imposed on his third day in office, while considering the State Department's annual authorization bill. In the intervening weeks the White House worked aggressively to convince lawmakers that overseas groups that provide abortions, refer patients to abortion clinics, or lobby on behalf of abortion rights did not deserve taxpayer funding. This afternoon's vote was 218-210, with 32 Democrats joining Republicans in approving the abortion-aid ban; 33 Republicans voted against it. The dispute over international family funding has raged on Capitol Hill since 1984, when President Reagan first put the prohibitions in place. The "Mexico City policy," as it came to be known, remained in effect throughout Reagan's second term and that of George Bush Sr. President Clinton removed the ban upon office in 1993, and successfully fought GOP efforts to revive it until late 1999, when he agreed to a modified set of restrictions. House International Relations Committee Chairman Henry J. Hyde (R-Ill.), who offered the amendment reimposing the ban, argued that funding groups which support abortions as an option was counterproductive. "Would we hire casino lobbyists to run an anti-gambling campaign?" Hyde asked. "It makes no sense to hire abortionists or abortion lobbyists to run programs that are aimed at reducing abortions." But opponents of the amendment noted that since 1973 no taxpayer funds can be used to pay for abortions abroad. Rep. James C. Greenwood (R-Penn.), who observed that the proposal would be unconstitutional in the United States, said it amounted to imposing one set of religious views on other countries. "This debate is about religious intolerance," Greenwood said. "That's un-American." © 2001 The Washington Post Company