Wednesday, July 10, 2013

HB2 Passes in Texas State House

With four more votes than it received before Wendy Davis filibustered the State Senate bill, the Texas House of Representatives passed HB2 with a vote of 98-49.  The process included a full day of debate and a couple of dozen amendments offered by those opposing the bill.  Now the wait as the State Senate continues its process on their bill, SB1, which should be voted on in a few days.  Lt Governor Dewhurst has expressed his confidence that the bill will pass without the theatrics of the last Special Session.

Politics is a messy business.

Today saw a death threat issued to the Texas Lt. Governor and abortion activists screaming “F— the Church.”
 The Democrats often mock Republicans for being anti-science.  In this case, however, either Democrats deny the presence of fetal pain, as proved in recent scientific findings, or simply do not think that is reason to re-consider abortion after 20 weeks.  Polling shows that the majority of people no longer think third trimester abortion is acceptable once those polled are given information on fetal pain.

A recent national poll by The Polling Company found that, after being informed that there is scientific evidence that unborn children are capable of feeling pain at least by 20 weeks, 64% would support a law banning abortion after 20 weeks, unless the mother’s life was in danger.   Only 30% said they would oppose such a law.

It is difficult to view the opposition as rational when their behavior is so offensive to regular observers of the process.  

Abortion activists haven’t covered themselves in glory in Austin. They hijacked “Amazing Grace,” have lied that they “stand for women” when they only stand for some women, have threatened to use SWAT tactics against pro-lifers, and all the while they have stood shoulder to shoulder with a greedy billion dollar corporation that has been caught in numerous lies and abuses. Not a classy run, really. 
Is yelling "hail, Satan" or "f**k the church" the way to move a viewpoint forward?   It is also interesting that today younger voters consider themselves as pro-life as opposed to older voters who are often allied with more pro-choice views.

It’s not new that most single-issue abortion voters are pro-life. But what has changed in recent years is that the broader public’s vague aversion to abortion on humanitarian grounds has intensified. Whether or not this translates to voting habits, abortion is becoming a less acceptable part of our culture to a greater number of people.The adult population describes itself as more pro-life now that it ever has since the Roe v. Wade decision, and the young (an important part of the Obama coalition) are significantly more pro-life than their parents were.  The “pro-life” description can be somewhat vague, but there are more concrete indicators that go beyond personal disapproval of abortion. A recent National Journal poll released this month asked voters specifically whether they support or oppose a ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy – a measure similar to what some Red states have been adopting, to the dismay of a lopsided liberal media. The public at large supports such a ban narrowly, but the split is especially telling. Those under 30 support it by double digits, whereas those over 50 (whose days of childbearing are long past, but who came of age in a different era) narrowly opposed the ban.It is very easy for poll questions on abortion to prejudice the answer to one side or the other. Yet regardless of how the question is asked or how the results come in, there is also no significant gap between men and women on the abortion issue. Where there is a gap, it’s usually because women are more likely to oppose most or all abortions. The National Journal poll, for example, found that they are significantly more supportive of a ban after 20 weeks. 
This week the Texas State Senate finishes the hearings and debate on their version of the bill - SB1. A vote will be by the end of the week or the beginning of next, according to Lt Governor Dewhurst.

No comments: