The National  Memo Logo

Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.

Monday, December 09, 2019 {{ new Date().getDay() }}

The United States is dealing with a major jobs crisis, the EU is teetering on the verge of collapse, and Americans are so frustrated with the financial sector that they’re willing to protest outside for a month or more, but Congress is busy debating whether or not to limit women’s access to abortion.

On Thursday, the House of Representatives approved the Protect Life Act, or H.R. 358, which would change the new health care law to prohibit federal funding from going toward health plans that cover abortion services and would also prevent funding from being withheld from institutions that oppose abortions. The bill includes an exception for abortions performed because of rape, incest, or a grave risk to the mother’s health, but it nonetheless limits abortion access in other cases.

The House approved the rule for the Protect Life Act in a 248-173 vote, taking a step toward passing the bill and opening up hours of debate. The general debate that followed was essentially a series of politicians using the opportunity to discuss why they are pro-choice or pro-life, rather than why they support the specific act in question. Some representatives did discuss the implications of the bill — including that a pregnant woman could potentially be denied appropriate treatment if she needs an emergency abortion — but such considerations clearly could not sway obstinate pro-life politicians. The act passed 251-172, with the vast majority of Republicans voting in favor and the vast majority of Democrats opposing it, unsurprisingly.

Even though the bill passed the House, it has a negligible chance of passing the Senate, and President Obama has already threatened to veto the bill if it reaches the White House. Given this information, Congress is essentially wasting time discussing abortion instead of focusing on more pressing issues. If nothing else, however, the bill is a reminder of what is at stake during elections, since politicians tend to vote on party lines on the abortion issue.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi criticized the proposal, telling reporters before the vote Thursday, “Under this bill, when the Republicans vote for this bill today, they will be voting to say that women can die on the floor of health care providers. … It’s just appalling. I can’t even describe to you the logic of what they are doing today.”

Of course, not understanding the logic of the House GOP is a common theme this session.

Advertising

Start your day with National Memo Newsletter

Know first.

The opinions that matter. Delivered to your inbox every morning

Jeff Danziger lives in New York City. He is represented by CWS Syndicate and the Washington Post Writers Group. He is the recipient of the Herblock Prize and the Thomas Nast (Landau) Prize. He served in the US Army in Vietnam and was awarded the Bronze Star and the Air Medal. He has published eleven books of cartoons, a novel and a memoir. Visit him at DanzigerCartoons.

Rep. Lauren Boebert

Youtube Screenshot

Not unlike Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Rep. Madison Cawthorn of North Carolina, Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado is a far-right MAGA Republican who has gone out of her way to court controversy since being sworn into the U.S. House of Representatives in January 2021. The 35-year-old Boebert, a QAnon supporter and conspiracy theorist, is running on a pseudo-populist platform in her 2022 reelection campaign. But journalist Abigail Weinberg, in an article published by Mother Jones , demonstrates that Boebert’s image as a “straight-talking small-town business owner” is a sham.

“A close look at Boebert’s past reveals cracks in the narrative she’s built,” Weinberg explains. “And for several people who worked at her restaurant and know her personally, Boebert’s American dream has been more like a ‘nightmare.’”

Keep reading... Show less
{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}