|
|
Ron DeSantis on Abortion |
Gov. Ron DESANTIS: I believe in a culture of life. I was proud to sign the Heartbeat Bill. I remember the most impactful moments of my life was when I heard the heartbeat of my oldest daughter in my wife's womb, and then saw the sonograms of all three of my kids. What the Democrats are trying to do on this issue is wrong, to allow abortion all the way up to the moment of birth.
Q: Would you sign a six-week ban federally?
DESANTIS: I'm going to stand on the side of life. Look, I understand, Wisconsin is going to do it different than Texas. I understand Iowa and New Hampshire are going to do different. But I will support the cause of life as governor and as president.
Q [to Gov. HALEY]: Your state today confirmed a 6-week abortion.
Nikki HALEY: I am unapologetically pro-life. Having said that, we need to stop demonizing this issue.
ACLU-FL testimony in opposition: If passed, nearly all abortions would be illegal after 6 weeks, before many women even know they are pregnant, or if they are aware, before they are able to satisfy the state-mandated requirement of two appointments with the doctor separated by at least 24 hours.
Governor's press release in favor 4/13: "We are proud to support life and family in the state of Florida. I applaud the Legislature for passing the Heartbeat Protection Act that expands pro-life protections and provides additional resources for young mothers and families."
Legislative Outcome: Passed Senate 26-13-1 on Apr/3/23; passed House 70-40-9 on Apr/13/23; signed by Gov. DeSantis on Apr/13/23.
"He supports dismemberment abortions where they literally tear the baby limb from limb. And he supports taxpayer-funded abortion all the way up to the moment of birth, and that is wrong," DeSantis said. That claim is mostly false. The claim refers to the Women's Health Protection Act which passed along party lines after Roe v. Wade was overturned.
Crist voted with the majority on the measure that, technically, would make abortion legal up to birth. The Washington Post has pointed out this is more political than practical reality since just 5.5% of abortions take place after 15 weeks and 1.3% are performed at 21 weeks or later.
Ron DeSantis (R): Ban. Pledges to sign legislation banning abortions after fetal heartbeat detected (roughly 6 weeks) & to appoint constitutionalist justices to FL Supreme Court who will "protect & defend life."
Andrew Gillum (D): Legal. Abortion is a woman's unrestricted right and decision should be made by women & their doctors--not by politicians. Opposes making healthcare harder for women to access.
Q: Allow employers to withhold contraceptive coverage from employees if disagree with it morally?
DeSantis: Yes. Employers should not be required to "pay for abortifacients in violation of their faith."
Gillum: No. Proposes a law to protect women's access to no-cost contraceptive care under ObamaCare.
Q: Let Planned Parenthood receive public funds for non-abortion healthcare?
DeSantis: No. Voted for a bill to end funding.
Gillum: Yes. Challenged Rick Scott effort to defund Planned Parenthood.
"Ron DeSantis is a Reagan conservative who will stand for limited government principles and traditional values," Schlafly said in a statement on Monday. "We must send authentic conservatives like Ron to Congress, not 'go along to get along' politicians who place expediency over principle. We cannot afford to elect anymore RINOs. Ron DeSantis represents a new generation of conservative leadership--he is pro-life, strong on marriage issues and is committed to bold reforms. He will be a leader in Congress and will be an articulate defender of the Constitution."
DeSantis said. "I am committed to reversing the Obama agenda and reasserting American sovereignty, limited government principles and religious freedom. I will be guided by the core values that have made America great."
Planned Parenthood provides reproductive services for women, including contraception, information on STDs, and abortion services. The organization receives federal funding, but not for abortion services. The organization scores legislators on their voting record on abortion rights.
Project Vote Smart infers candidate issue stances on key topics by summarizing public speeches and public statements. Congressional candidates are given the opportunity to respond in detail; about 11% did so in the 2012 races.
Project Vote Smart summarizes candidate stances on the following topic: 'Abortion: Do you generally support pro-choice or pro-life legislation?'
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.
ACLU recommendation to vote NO: (1/22/2015): We urge voting against H.R. 7. The legislation is broad and deeply troubling and the ACLU opposes it [because] H.R. 7 would make discriminatory restrictions that harm women`s health permanent law. The bill singles out and excludes abortion from a host of programs that fulfill the government`s obligation to provide health care to certain populations. Women who rely on the government for their health care do not have access to a health care service readily available to women of means and women with private insurance. The government should not discriminate in this way. It should not use its power of the purse to intrude on a woman`s decision whether to carry to term or to terminate her pregnancy and selectively withhold benefits because she seeks to exercise her right of reproductive choice in a manner the government disfavors.
Cato Institute recommendation to vote YES: (11/10/2009): President Obama`s approach to health care reform--forcing taxpayers to subsidize health insurance for tens of millions of Americans--cannot not change the status quo on abortion. Either those taxpayer dollars will fund abortions, or the restrictions necessary to prevent taxpayer funding will curtail access to private abortion coverage. There is no middle ground.
Thus both sides` fears are justified. Both sides of the abortion debate are learning why government should not subsidize health care.
Legislative outcome: Passed by the House 242-179-12; never came to a vote in the Senate.
Heritage Action Summary: This legislation will protect unborn children by preventing abortions five months after fertilization, at which time scientific evidence suggests the child can feel pain.
ACLU recommendation to vote NO: (Letter to House of Representatives, 6/18/2013): The ACLU urges you to vote against the misleadingly-captioned `Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act,` which would ban abortion care starting at 20 weeks of pregnancy. H.R. 1797 [2013 version of H.R.36 in 2015] is part of a wave of ever-more extreme legislation attempting to restrict a woman`s right to make her own decision about whether or not to continue a pregnancy. We have seen state after state try to take these decisions away from women and their families; H.R. 1797 would do the same nationwide. We oppose H.R. 1797 because it interferes in a woman`s most personal, private medical decisions. H.R. 1797 bans abortions necessary to protect a woman`s health, no matter how severe the situation. H.R. 1797 would force a woman and her doctor to wait until her condition was terminal to finally act to protect her health, but by then it may be too late. This restriction is not only cruel, it is blatantly unconstitutional.
Cato Institute recommendation to vote YES: (2/2/2011): Pro-lifers herald a breakthrough law passed by the Nebraska legislature on Oct. 15, 2010: the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act prohibits abortion after 20 weeks gestation except when the mother has a condition which so `complicates her medical condition as to necessitate the abortion of her pregnancy to avert death or to avert serious risk of substantial or irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function.` Versions of the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act are [being] introduced in a number of state legislatures.
Legislative outcome: Passed by the House 242-184-6; never came to a vote in the Senate.