#Filemon vela jr. full#
#Filemon vela jr. professional#

#Filemon vela jr. full#

Heritage Action Summary: The No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act (H.R.7) would establish a permanent, government-wide prohibition on federal taxpayer funding of abortion and health benefits plans that include coverage of abortion, as well as prevent federal tax dollars from being entangled in abortion coverage under ObamaCare.ĪCLU recommendation to vote NO: (): We urge voting against H.R. Vela voted NAY No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act Source: Women's Health Protection Act 15_H448 on Jan 21, 2015įunding abortion avoids discrimination against poor women. Myth: Ultrasounds and their descriptions are 'cruel and inhumane.'įact: Allowing women the opportunity to view their ultrasounds serves an important role in providing informed consent, enabling women to exercise true choice.This would constitute malpractice in any other scenario. Myth: Admitting privileges laws are 'not medically justified.'įact: Women with abortion complications are told to go to an emergency department.Myth: 'Where abortion services are restricted and unavailable, abortions still occur and are mostly unsafe.'įact: Where abortion is restricted, maternal mortality rates have decreased.Myth: Life-affirming laws are enacted 'under the false pretext of health and safety.'įact: Induced abortion is associated with significant risks and potential harms to women.1696, Senators heard many myths from abortion proponents about the 'need' for the bill's evisceration of all life-affirming legislation. Opponents reasons for voting NAY:(National Review, July 17, 2014):ĭuring hearings on S. It is the purpose of this Act to protect women's health by ensuring that abortion services will continue to be available and that abortion providers are not singled out for medically unwarranted restrictions.The cumulative effect of these numerous restrictions has been that a woman's ability to exercise her constitutional rights is dependent on the State in which she lives.These restrictions harm women's health by reducing access to the other essential health care services offered by the providers targeted by the restrictions, including contraceptive services.Source: H.R.3471 & S.1696 14-H3471 on Nov 13, 2013Īccess safe, legal abortion without restrictions.Ĭongressional Summary: Congress finds the following:Īccess to safe, legal abortion services has been hindered in various ways, including blockades of health care facilities restrictions on insurance coverage restrictions on minors' ability to obtain services and requirements that single out abortion providers. Sadly, the bill also uses the Fourteenth Amendment to justify abortion, as the Supreme Court did, even though in actuality it would make much more sense to protect the lives of unborn Americans. Those who feel that abortion is best left up for the states to decide will also find this bill problematic with its overreach. The bill also demonstrates that its proponents have likely not even bothered attempting to understand the laws they are seeking to undo, considering that such laws are in place to regulate abortion in order to make it safer. The sponsors of this pro-abortion bill also seem to feel that pro-life bills have had their time in this country, and that we must now turn back to abortion. Its first finding addresses 'women's ability to participate equally' many have rejected this claim that women need abortion in order to be equal to men, or that they need to be like men at all. The bill is problematic from the very beginning. Opponent's argument against (Live Action News): a prohibition or ban prior to fetal viability.

a requirement that, prior to obtaining an abortion, a woman make medically unnecessary visits to the provider of abortion services or to any individual or entity that does not provide such services.a requirement or limitation concerning the physical plant, equipment, staffing, or hospital transfer arrangements.a limitation on an abortion provider's ability to prescribe or dispense drugs based on her or his good-faith medical judgment.a limitation on an abortion provider's ability to delegate tasks.

#Filemon vela jr. professional#

a requirement that a medical professional perform specific tests, unless generally required in the case of medically comparable procedures.

Vela co-sponsored Women's Health Protection ActĬongressional summary:: Women's Health Protection Act: makes the following limitations concerning abortion services unlawful and prohibits their imposition or application by any government: Ban anti-abortion limitations on abortion services.