This happened last week but I find it interesting. Here is the video, courtesy of CNS News:
FYI, note that Senator Casey (D-Penn.) says in the video that he would oppose the bill because of this amendment.
The Washington Times is reporting that Senator Reid is saying "no" to a health care vote in the Senate until after the August break. This doesn't mean that things are going to let up. The Senate fight won't be pretty and we would do better to kill it in the House.
This is going to be dicey folks.
A letter signed by the leaders and representatives of thirty pro-life organizations was sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee asking for a review of Obama nominees.
Republican Senator Saxby Chambliss won his senate seat last night against Democratic challenger Jim Martin.
Chambliss' seat has been in the spotlight because it could have given Democrats a filibuster-proof majority. Filibusters are necessary to block bad legislation or to have it changed. It's usually reserved for legislation that the opposing party finds completely unacceptable so it doesn't happen often.
Having enough for a filibuster gives Republicans in the Senate some strength and power to negotiate on legislation.
It shouldn't be surprising but, yesterday, Senate Democrats defeated an amendment that was designed to help financially challenged and uninsured (not necessarily poor) pregnant women by insuring their unborn children through S-CHIP (The State Children's Health Insurance Program). The S-CHIP program was designed 10 years ago to provide health insurance coverage to children whose parents made too much money to be on Medicaid but made too little to pay for health insurance themselves.
Since 2002, President Bush has allowed states to cover unborn children under the program and this had the win-win benefit of covering the mother as well. The way S-CHIP was written into law, it was designed solely for children under the age of 18. By law, the only way to insure the pregnant mother (if over the age of 18) was to insure her unborn child.
Democrats opposed this and have been fighting to rewrite the legislation to insure the pregnant woman but not her unborn child.
Of course, this defeats the whole point of a childrens' health insurance program. It also allows Democrats to set up a loose and poorly designed experiment in universal health care. Yesterday's vote had less to do with insurance coverage than it did with abortion politics.
In a vote that was not unexpected, the Senate voted 63-34 in favor of Senator Harkin's bill, S.5. The bill would mandate that federal funds be used for stem cell research that requires the destruction of human embryos.
President Bush promises a veto and the final tally was short of the 2/3rds needed for an override of a presidential veto. However, it moves us one step (or one election) closer to taxpayer funds being used to destroy vulnerable human beings.
They may literally be a "clump of cells" but human embryos require only time, nourishment and a safe place to grow until they develop into the newborns we ooh and ah over. All of the genetic material that makes each of us unique is present at the moment of fertilization.
And should you think that this type of legislation is the pinnacle achievement, think again. Many advocates of this research assert that this is only the beginning. Cloning and stem cells culled from older embryos and fetuses are next on the list.
During debate yesterday in the Senate, Senators Harkin and Specter apparently made assertions about stem cell research that, for lack of a better turn of phrase, could be called deceptive.
According to the Family Research Council, Senator Harkin claims that S.5 has "tighter" ethical guidelines than the President's policy on embryonic stem cell research. How Sen. Harkin thinks that deliberately killing human embryos somehow makes for better ethics is unclear.
Senator Specter claims that the 400,000 embryos currently frozen in storage will be destroyed--they should be used for research. However, a Rand Institute study determined that only 2.8 percent of the 400,000 embryos in storage have been slated for research. The rest are not scheduled for destruction or donation but are being saved by their parents. Rand also estimates that finding all of them useable and then using all of the 2.8 percent available would yield only 275 new cell lines. Far less than what proponents claim. Obviously the next step would be to create human embryos for the express purpose of destroying them for research. And if you think that's a stretch, the BIO lobby has been pushing for federal funds to create embryos for research since day one.
Give them an inch. . .
On April 10, the U.S. Senate will begin debate on funding for embryonic stem cell research and a vote is expected on April 11. If the legislation passes, the president has promised that he will veto any funding bill that arrives on his desk. The question is whether there may be enough votes for an override.
To contact your senators and tell them not to vote for S.5, call the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121 and let the operator know your senators' names. If you don't know, just let the operator know what state you live in and he or she will put you through to the correct offices.
