NRLC Mourns the Death of Robert Schindler, Sr.

For immediate release:                                        
Saturday, August 29, 2009      

NATIONAL RIGHT TO LIFE MOURNS THE LOSS
OF ROBERT SCHINDLER, SR.

 WASHINGTON – The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), the nation’s largest pro-life group, today joined with pro-lifers nationwide in mourning the passing of our dear friend Robert Schindler, Sr., the father of Terri Schindler Schiavo.  Mr. Schindler died this morning in St. Petersburg, Florida.

 “Bob Schindler was an extraordinary father, husband and friend,” said Wanda Franz, Ph.D., National Right to Life President.  “His death is a profound loss for all of us in the pro-life movement.  Today, our thoughts and prayers are with his loving wife, Mary and their children, Bobby and Suzanne.”

 Despite facing legal setbacks at virtually every turn, the Schindlers, with their children at their side, fought unceasingly to defend the right of their daughter, Terri Schindler Schiavo, to receive food and fluids.  Their brave struggle ended on March 31, 2005, when Terri died from a court-ordered withdrawal of nutrition and hydration.

 Following Terri’s death, the family began advocating for other medically dependent and disabled patients facing similar circumstances through the Terri Schindler Schiavo Foundation.

 In 2007, the National Right to Life Educational Trust Fund honored the Schindler family with the Proudly Pro-Life Award for their dedication and public witness to the cause of life.

 “In life, Bob, and his wife Mary, never sought the spotlight.  They only wished to care for their beloved daughter, Terri.  Through their selfless dedication to Terri, they showed the nation and the world what it means when someone says they are ‘pro-life’,” added David N. O’Steen, Ph.D., National Right to Life Executive Director.

 The National Right to Life Committee, the nation’s largest pro-life group is a federation of affiliates in all 50 states and 3,000 local chapters nationwide.  National Right to Life works through legislation and education to protect those threatened by abortion, infanticide, euthanasia and assisted suicide.

# # #

NRLC responds to Obama “fabrication” charge

For immediate release:
Wednesday, August 19, 2009      

OBAMA SAYS “GOVERNMENT FUNDING OF ABORTION IS A FABRICATION,”
BUT THE WHITE HOUSE-BACKED HOUSE BILL EXPLICITELY AUTHORIZES IT

 WASHINGTON (August 19, 2009) — In a conference call with supporters this afternoon, President Obama said that it is a “fabrication” to say that the legislation backed by the White House would result in “government funding of abortions,” and that this is “untrue.”  The following comment may be attributed to Douglas Johnson, legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), the national federation of state and local right-to-life organizations:

 Emboldened by the recently demonstrated superficiality of some organs of the news media, President Obama today brazenly misrepresented the abortion-related component of the health care legislation that his congressional allies and staff have crafted.  As amended by the House Energy and Commerce Committee on July 30 (the Capps-Waxman Amendment), the bill backed by the White House (H.R. 3200) explicitly authorizes the government plan to cover all elective abortions.  Obama apparently seeks to hide behind a technical distinction between tax funds and government-collected premiums.  But these are merely two types of public funds, collected and spent by government agencies.  The Obama-backed legislation makes it explicitly clear that no citizen would be allowed to enroll in the government plan unless he or she is willing to give the federal agency an extra amount calculated to cover the cost of all elective abortions — this would not be optional.  The abortionists would bill the federal government and would be paid by the federal government.  These are public funds, and this is government funding of abortion.

 In 2007 Obama explicitly pledged to Planned Parenthood that the public plan will cover abortions (see the video clip here).  Some journalists have reported that Obama “backed off” of this commitment in an interview with Katie Couric of CBS News, broadcast July 21, but Obama actually carefully avoided stating his intentions — instead, he simply made an artful observation that “we also have a tradition of, in this town, historically, of not financing abortions as part of government funded health care.”

 It is true that there is such a tradition — which Obama has always opposed, and which the Obama-backed bill would shatter.

On August 13, NRLC released a detailed memo explaining the provisions of the pending bills that would affect abortion policy, with citations to primary sources. Many of the “factcheck” articles that have appeared in the news media in recent weeks reflect, at best, unsophisticated understandings of the provisions they purport to be explaining, and also give evidence of a weak understanding of Obama’s history on the policy issues involved.  The memo is downloadable in PDF format here:

http://www.nrlc.org/AHC/HR3200NRLCfactsheet.pdf

 The National Right to Life Committee is the nation’s largest pro-life group is a federation of affiliates in all 50 states and over 3,000 local chapters nationwide.  National Right to Life works through legislation and education to protect those threatened by abortion, infanticide, euthanasia and assisted suicide.

# # #

Obama Promises Abortion in Public Plan

Listen to then-Senator and presidential candidate Barack Obama promise abortion as part of a public health care plan.

2008 Oklahoma Ultrasound Law Struck

For immediate release:                                        
Tuesday, August 18, 2009  

TECHNICALITY TAKES OUT OKLAHOMA ULTRASOUND LAW

WASHINGTON — Today, in the case of Nova Health Systems v. Henry, the County District Court in Oklahoma struck down SB 1878, a bill providing expectant mothers the opportunity to view the ultrasound image of their unborn child.  The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) and its affiliate, Oklahomans for Life, supported the measure and urged its passage.

 “The court’s ruling is by no means a condemnation of the commonsense protections provided for in the legislation,” said Mary Spaulding Balch, National Right to Life director of state legislation. “The court’s decision was based solely on a procedural issue and not the substantive matters addressed in the bill.”

 The court determined that the law violated Oklahoma’s single-subject rule which requires legislation only deal with one issue at the time. SB 1878 was an omnibus bill that addressed five abortion-related issues.

 Besides the ultrasound provision the law required that distribution of the abortion pill RU-486 follow federal protocol, a logical standard for administration of a lethal drug. In an attempt to prohibit coercive abortions the law required abortion clinic to display a simple sign stating that no-one can force a woman to have an abortion against her will. Along with protecting the essential right of conscience, the law would have prevented wrongful birth lawsuits that argue a child should have never been born.

 “When all is said and done and the dust has settled from today’s ruling we fully expect that each of these laws will be given full effect in Oklahoma,” Balch said.

 The National Right to Life Committee, the nation’s largest pro-life group is a federation of affiliates in all 50 states and 3,000 local chapters nationwide.  National Right to Life works through legislation and education to protect those threatened by abortion, infanticide, euthanasia and assisted suicide.

 # # #

Letter to the NYTimes Editor

August 17, 2009

 Letters to the Editor
The New York Times
620 Eighth Avenue
New York, NY 10018

 Dear Editor,

  I was saddened to read “False ‘Death Panel’ Rumor Has Familiar Roots” in the Friday (August 14, 2009) edition of the Times.  Rather than examine the actual text of the bills, the Times simply editorialized against opponents of provisions within the health care proposals currently being considered.  The opening paragraph reads like something that might be uttered by Robert Gibbs during the daily press briefing in the West Wing. The job description of the White House Press Secretary and an independent newspaper are not one in the same, and by continuing to justify rather than report on this administration’s agenda the Times is failing it readership.

What the Times calls “rumors,” in fact, have some roots in a piece which the Times itself published.   That item, interestingly omitted from the article’s chronology of the rising “specter of government-sponsored, forced euthanasia,” was a 5,000-word feature piece published in the New York Times Magazine on July 19^th by Princeton bioethicist Peter Singer, openly advocating the rationing of healthcare on the basis of QALYs, a measurement of one’s “quality-adjusted-life-year.”

As National Right to Life has noted in its analysis of the current proposal before the House, there is no protection to prevent Comparative Effectiveness Research from being used to discriminatorily deny healthcare based on age, present or predicted disability or expected length of life. To insist that this is a dangerous omission which could allow comparative effectiveness to be used to deny care to the most vulnerable patients is not fear-mongering, it is a realistic concern. Perhaps if the Times was not so ideologically invested in promoting this administration’s agenda they would be able to see that as well.

 Sincerely,

Derrick Jones
Communications Director
National Right to Life

New Resources on Abortion in Health Care

WASHINGTON (August 15, 2009) – The purpose of this e-mail is to alert you to a number of new documents available on the NRLC website, dealing with the abortion-related implications of the health-care restructuring bills that are being pushed by the White House.  The new resources include the following:

 – A new and detailed NRLC memorandum that documents the abortion-related problems with the two bills that President Obama and the White House are pushing:  Senator Kennedy’s bill (as yet unnumbered) and the House Democratic leadership bill, H.R. 3200.  This analysis contains numerous citations to primary sources.  It includes an examination of the Capps Amendment, a “phony compromise” that was written by hard-core pro-abortion lawmakers and adopted over pro-life objections in one House committee on July 30.  Among other objectionable elements, the Capps Amendment explicitly authorizes coverage of all elective abortions in the proposed new government health insurance program (the “public option”).  This memo, dated August 13, 2009, can be viewed or downloaded here (PDF format).

 – A one-page summary of abortion-related problems with the bills, here.

 – An August 5, 2009, Associated Press story, “Government insurance would allow coverage for abortion,” by Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, here.

 – A detailed update on the current state of the debate in Congress, sent to NRLC affiliates and supporters nationwide on August 7 in the form of a page 1 article in the National Right to Life News.  This article can be viewed in your web browser here or downloaded in PDF format from here.

 – A special webpage set up by NRLC to highlight the pro-abortion activities of Congressman Tim Ryan (D-Oh.), who impersonates a pro-life lawmaker in the media in order to undercut the efforts of the real pro-life lawmakers of both parties, here.

 – A new letter sent to members of the U.S. House by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops on August 11, urging the lawmakers to vote against the “rule” – the procedural bridge by which H.R. 3200 would be brought to the House floor in September — unless the rule allows consideration of amendments to remove the pro-abortion components from the bill.  To view or download the letter (PDF format), click here.

Youc an also visit www.nrlc.com/AHC/index.html for these and other documents on abortion in healthcare.

Tim Ryan: Pro-Life Impersonator

Congressman Tim Ryan (D- Oh.) has become a major asset to the pro-abortion lobby in Washington. In recent weeks, for example, Ryan has worked with pro-abortion groups to undermine the efforts of the pro-life members of the U.S. House of Representatives (of both parties) who are seeking to remove pro-abortion provisions from the health care bills being pushed by the Obama White House.

Although Ryan’s voting record in recent years is NOT pro-life, he continues to impersonate a pro-life lawmaker in order to undercut genuine pro-life initiatives in Congress. Therefore, NRLC has set up a special web page that links to several detailed documents regarding Ryan’s pro-abortion activities, including a report by veteran NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson. This report contains quotes critical of Ryan from multiple pro-life groups and from key pro-life members of the House of Representatives.

The page also links to a recent article about Ryan published by The Weekly Standard.

To visit the new NRLC page on “Tim Ryan, pro-life impersonator,” click here .

Eunice Kennedy Shriver: Rest in Peace

Eunice Kennedy Shriver with John Cardinal O'Connor at the 1994 Proudly Pro-Life Awards Dinner.

  Tributes from around the world continue to pour in for Eunice Kennedy Shriver, who passed away yesterday at age 88. National Right to Life would like to add ours.

  NRLC veterans remember when Mrs. Shriver attended the Proudly Pro-Life Awards Dinner in 1994 which honored John Cardinal O’Conner and Nancy DeMoss of The Arthur DeMoss Foundation. The following year Mrs. Shriver, along with her husband, Sargent Shriver, served as Honorary Chairpersons for the Proudly Pro-Life Awards Dinner that honored Illinois Rep. Henry Hyde, Pennsylvania Gov. Robert Casey, and Mother Teresa of Calcutta.

   Mrs. Shriver is best known, of course, for being the driving force behind the Special Olympics. Like all revolutions, what seems ordinary now was a breathtaking change in understanding 30 and 40 years ago.

   The most telling reminiscences have not been from high-powered political insiders, although as a sister of President John F. Kennedy and Senators Robert and Ted Kennedy, she no doubt had access to them all. They are from ordinary citizens whose children’s lives were made immensely richer because of the power of the Special Olympics’ example

   We have many miles to go before we fully treat people with disabilities with the kind of generosity and respect that is owed them simply because they are fellow members of the human family. But that the journey has begun at all is in no small measure the result of the labors of Mrs. Shriver.

    We forget how the prevailing thought at the time was that children with mental retardation should be excluded from physical activity out of fear that these kids might injure themselves. But in her address at the opening ceremony of the first Special Olympics in 1968, just weeks after the assassination of Robert Kennedy, Mrs. Shriver said “The Chicago Special Olympics prove a very fundamental fact, the fact that exceptional children — children with mental retardation — can be exceptional athletes, the fact that through sports they can realize their potential for growth.”

    There could be no more fitting ending than the concluding paragraphs of her family’s statement on her passing:

    Inspired by her love of God, her devotion to her family, and her relentless belief in the dignity and worth of every human life, she worked without ceasing ─ searching, pushing, demanding, hoping for change. She was a living prayer, a living advocate, a living center of power. She set out to change the world and to change us, and she did that and more. She founded the movement that became Special Olympics, the largest movement for acceptance and inclusion for people with intellectual disabilities in the history of the world. Her work transformed the lives of hundreds of millions of people across the globe, and they in turn are her living legacy.

   We have always been honored to share our mother with people of good will the world over who believe, as she did, that there is no limit to the human spirit. At this time of loss, we feel overwhelmed by the gifts of prayer and support poured out to us from so many who loved her. We are together in our belief that she is now in heaven, rejoicing with her family, enjoying the fruits of her faith, and still urging us onward to the challenges ahead. Her love will inspire us to faith and service always.

  She was forever devoted to the Blessed Mother. May she be welcomed now by Mary to the joy and love of life everlasting, in the certain truth that her love and spirit will live forever.

AP confirms: Obama plan would allow abortion coverage

For more information:
Federal Legislation Department (202) 626-8820, legfederal@aol.com 
or Communications Department at (202) 626-8825, mediarelations@nrlc.org.

AP confirms:  Obama plan would allow abortion coverage 

 As the Associated Press accurately reports in a new story below, the health care legislation being pushed by the Obama White House would cover elective abortions.  Under the Senate bill, sponsored by Senator Kennedy, “the public plan — and private insurance offered in the exchange — would be allowed to cover abortion, without funding restrictions,” the AP reports.  Phony “compromise” language approved by a House committee, over pro-life objections (the Capps Amendment), would authorize the new government-run “public plan” to cover elective abortions, and also permit new federal premium subsidies to flow to private plans that cover elective abortions.  ”Under either the Senate bill or the House bill, the federal government would run a huge system of subsidizing elective abortion,” said NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson.  For further information and documentation, visit the NRLC Legislative Action Center at www.nrlactioncenter.com.

 ************

August 5, 2009

Associated Press

 Original URL:  http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jE8oH07rubGHV6lmgcgIGJFdUdkAD99SLQBG0

 Gov’t insurance would allow coverage for abortion
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR (AP)

WASHINGTON — Health care legislation before Congress would allow a new government-sponsored insurance plan to cover abortions, a decision that would affect millions of women and recast federal policy on the divisive issue.

Federal funds for abortions are now restricted to cases involving rape, incest or danger to the health ["life"] of the mother. Abortion opponents say those restrictions should carry over to any health insurance sold through a new marketplace envisioned under the legislation, an exchange where people would choose private coverage or the public plan.

Abortion rights supporters say that would have the effect of denying coverage for abortion to millions of women who now have it through workplace insurance and are expected to join the exchange.

Advocates on both sides are preparing for a renewed battle over abortion, which could jeopardize political support for President Barack Obama’s health care initiative aimed at covering nearly 50 million uninsured and restraining medical costs.

“We want to see people who have no health insurance get it, but this is a sticking point,” said Richard Doerflinger, associate director of pro-life activities for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. “We don’t want health care reform to be the vehicle for mandating abortion.”

Donna Crane, policy director for NARAL Pro-Choice America, said abortion opponents “want an abortion ban in private insurance, and that’s not neutrality at all — that’s a radical departure from current law. They want something far more extreme than where I think the American public is.”

A compromise approved by a House committee last week attempted to balance questions of federal funding, personal choice and the conscience rights of clinicians. It would allow the public plan to cover abortion but without using federal funds, only dollars from beneficiary premiums. Likewise, private plans in the new insurance exchange could opt to cover abortion, but no federal subsidies would be used to pay for the procedure.

“It’s a sham,” said Douglas Johnson, legislative director for National Right to Life. “It’s a bookkeeping scheme. The plan pays for abortion, and the government subsidizes the plan.”

Rep. Lois Capps, D-Calif., author of the compromise, said she was trying to craft a solution that would accommodate both sides. Her amendment also would allow plans that covered no abortions whatsoever — not even in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother — to be offered through the insurance exchange.

“With all due respect, not everyone adheres to what the Catholic bishops believe,” said Capps, who supports abortion rights. “Our country allows for both sides, and our health plan should reflect that as well.”

For years, abortion rights supporters and abortion opponents have waged the equivalent of trench warfare over restrictions on federal funding. Abortion opponents have largely prevailed, instituting restrictions that bar federal funding for abortion, except in cases of rape and incest or if the mother’s life would be endangered.

A law called the Hyde amendment applies the restrictions to Medicaid, forcing states that cover abortion for low-income women to do so with their own money. Separate laws apply the restrictions to the federal employee health plan and military and other programs.

But the health overhaul would create a stream of federal funding not covered by the restrictions.

The new federal funds would take the form of subsidies for low- and middle-income people buying coverage through the health insurance exchange. Subsidies would be available for people to buy the public plan or private coverage. Making things more complicated, the federal subsidies would be mixed in with contributions from individuals and employers. Eventually, most Americans could end up getting their coverage through the exchange.

The Democratic health care legislation as originally introduced in the House and Senate did not mention abortion. That rang alarm bells for abortion opponents.

Since abortion is a legal medical procedure, experts on both sides say not mentioning it would allow health care plans in the new insurance exchange to provide unrestricted coverage.

It would mirror the private insurance market, where abortion coverage is widely available. A Guttmacher Institute study found that 87 percent of typical employer plans covered abortion in 2002, while a Kaiser Family Foundation survey in 2003 found that 46 percent of workers in employer plans had coverage for abortions. The studies asked different questions, which might help explain the disparity in the results.

In the Senate, the plan passed by the health committee is still largely silent on the abortion issue. Staff aides confirmed that the public plan — and private insurance offered in the exchange — would be allowed to cover abortion, without funding restrictions.

Under both the House and Senate approaches, the decision to offer abortion coverage in the public plan would be made by the health and human services secretary.

Abortion opponents are seeking a prohibition against using any federal subsidies to pay for abortions or for any part of any costs of a health plan that offers abortion. Such a proposal was rejected by the House Energy and Commerce Committee, the same panel that approved Capps’ amendment.

But abortion opponents say they can’t accept a public plan that would cover abortion. And they say private plans in the insurance exchange should offer abortion coverage separately, as an option.

“You can have a result where nobody has to pay for other people’s abortions,” said Doerflinger.

Heidi Hartmann, president of the Institute for Women’s Policy Research, said applying the current restrictions for federal employees and low-income women to a program intended for the middle class will provoke a backlash.

“There is a difference between picking off one group of women here and one group there and something that would affect a very large group,” Hartmann said. “Everyone would like to avoid that fight.”

Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Staying Current?

As we all know, the health care debate in Washington is changing on an almost hourly basis.  Even with the House in recess and the Senate getting ready to leave town for the rest of August, things can change quickly.  If you haven’t already checked out the latest alert from our Federal Legislation Deparment, head over to National Right to Life’s Legislative Action Center at www.nrlactioncenter.com.  Even if you have been there, it’s best to make the Action Center part of your regular rounds on the web.  The Action Alert on health care is updated constantly (last update as of this post is August 1) to keep up with the changing landscape.

Also, check out the latest Today’s News and Views from our NRL News Editor, Dave Andrusko.  You can sign up to have it delivered to your inbox.  Or you can follow us on Twitter – TN&V is tweeted daily. (www.twitter.com/nrlc). 

And, of course, be sure to check back in here for the latest news from the Communications Department.   Congress may be in recess, but we’ve got work to do!