Abortion more important to Democrats than stopping sex-trafficking as they block bipartisan bill

A recent Gallup poll listed America’s number one problem is government. I know one of the troubling issues is whether or not Members of Congress even read the bills offered — there is sad reminder of just that. And of course, there’s the matter of where priorities lie.

As reported by Fox News, “A bipartisan bill aimed at combating human sex trafficking has hit a major snag after Senate Democrats — who unanimously voted to move the bill out of committee — hit the brakes upon discovering a Republican-backed abortion provision.”

“Though the relatively modest 68-page bill has been available for nearly two months, it wasn’t until this week that Senate Democrats said they noticed the language, and subsequently threatened to block the bill. As drafted, the legislation would crack down on what lawmakers in both parties agree is a seamy underworld of drugs and human sex trafficking akin to modern-day slavery. Fines paid by those convicted of the sex-trafficking crimes would go into a fund to help victims. But Democrats now are balking because the legislation also contains a Republican-inserted provision that bars the use of fines to pay for abortions, except in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the pregnant woman is in jeopardy.’

“Democrats believe that divisive issues like this should be kept off what is otherwise a broadly bipartisan bill,” a spokesman for Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid said, adding that they’re trying to find a “path forward.”

This piece of legislation was voted out of committee. It was also voted under the rules of cloture meaning in the Senate it could be brought to the Senate floor for a vote. It is only 68 pages long and now the Senate Democrats are balking at a provision that was always in the legislation and as Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said, Democrats had indeed know of the provision as they had discussed it.

Senate Democrats are now in a very interesting position — almost untenable — as they must explain their desire to use government confiscated funds from sex trafficking offenders for the purpose of killing babies. The Senate GOP provision states those confiscated fines could be used in cases of rape, incest, and the life of a pregnant woman being in jeopardy — but that’s not good enough for the progressive socialist abortionists. They support the killing of babies by any means necessary. Let’s be honest that’s what this is — it is not women’s reproductive health or rights.

I fully support women’s reproductive health — the fight against cervical, ovarian, and uterine cancers. But we should not forget the rights of the unborn.

So why the faux protest from the Senate Democrats now? Because I bet those groups who support them financially — Planned Parenthood and Emily’s List –made the call to the Senate Minority Leader and persuaded him to pull support. There’s no other explanation since this legislation had passed two previous hurdles.

Sadly we clearly see where the priorities of the liberal progressive left lie—it’s certainly not caring for the women and children who are victims of human sex-trafficking.

For the left, nothing can ever stand in the way of killing babies, honoring the vision of Margaret Sanger. And so the Senate Democrats want the freedom to use the collected fines with NO restrictions on their use in the practice of killing babies. The Senate Democrat argument is that the fines are not government funds — but rather private monies.

Now, I ain’t the most brilliant fella in the world, but it seems to me that’s contradictory to the premise of Obamacare “fines” for not purchasing health insurance. The SCOTUS ruled the Affordable Care Act constitutional because these “fines” were permitted under the taxing authority of the Congress.

So I’m a little confused. Why is it that the “fines” levied against honest hardworking Americans are ruled a tax — government resources. Yet, in the case of protecting innocent women and children victims of human sex trafficking and levying, “fines” against those despicable perpetrators are considered private monies — all so the Democrats can further victimize unborn children.

The hypocrisy would be laughable if not so very horrible. So much for the “War on Women.” Sex trafficking matters little to the liberal progressive leftist abortionists if it in anyway affects killing unborn babies. Not only have the Senate Democrats embarrassed themselves by showing they don’t read legislation. They’ve just shown — once again — the meaning of duplicitous hypocrisy.

Fines are taxes controlled by government when liberal progressives control government. Fines are private funds when they don’t — and how often in the first two years of the Obama reign when the Democrats held the House and Senate did you hear the word “bipartisanship?”

The rules are different for Democrats than for Republicans — just look at the Hillary Clinton email issue as a case in point.

The Senate GOP offered a reasonable amendment that the Democrats were aware of — or they were just too lazy to read the 68 pages of the legislation?

Regardless I suppose it depends on what the meaning of “fines” is.

Leave a Reply

22 Comments on "Abortion more important to Democrats than stopping sex-trafficking as they block bipartisan bill"

avatar
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
nja
Guest

I sure do wish he would run for President! Truth and common sense!

Guest
Guest

☭►►►☭get $69 /hr@aa2:

Going Here you
Can Find Out,,

►►► ::>>https://PrimeyJobs99.com/get/position….

Uncle Ruckus
Guest

Who??? Allen (I’ve never experienced racism) west?

Andy Martin
Guest

It just frosts your ass that not all blacks play the raced card.

Adetoz
Guest

I’m sure you haven’t read the blog where he wrote about racism he experienced at University and how he confronted it by telling his white room mate that he is going nowhere and that they would get to know one another. That is a real man Ruckus. A true American.

Uncle Ruckus
Guest

Allen West says he never experienced racism because he was ‘respectful’

Uncle Ruckus
Guest

I’m sorry but I also read the article where the man said that he has NEVER experienced racism in his entire LIFE

Andy Martin
Guest

Ignore unc punk ass. He’s been weaned on the teats of Al, Jesse, Holder, Obama and Rev Wright…………oh and Farrakhan too.

Adetoz
Guest

The Irony of Ruckus’ stance is that the Dem Party which he probably supports is currently engaging in an act that would make the poor sections of the black community in America redundant. The Democrats are importing or helping to facilitate the importing of millions of illegals into the States. This means that the jobs that would be going to poorer black people would be taken up by cheaper new hispanic immigrants.

This, as Malcolm X says, is the stupidity of those blacks who vote Democrats. “Chumps” I believe he called them.

Andy Martin
Guest

Unc suck ass is incapable of thinking that deep Adetoz. He a
preprogrammed race pimp at best.

Adetoz
Guest
Dude, I’m not even American…I’m a British conservative and I see the state of race relations in America. No doubt it’s worse now than it has been for a long time. Thanks to the Emperor in Chief Obama. Don’t give up on the likes of the Ruckus, I hope that many like him will see through the lies of liberal thinking. However before they can come to that point they need people who will not descend to their level with name calling. It does not help us or them and it certainly does not resolve the racial divide issues in… Read more »
Andy Martin
Guest

Understood. But when I see race pimping garbage I call it out. I’m old enough to remember the riots of the 1960’s. Back then, many whites were sensitive to the issues and basically ‘excused’ the bad behavior. This isn’t 1966-67-68 anymore. No excuses, no looking the other way and saying nothing. Call out the POS when they pop up and deal with them. Take care.

Rand0Mone
Guest

Republicans hold a 54 to 44 majority over the democrats in the Senate, with 2 independents. How did the democrats defeat the bill??

Rafael X
Guest

Filibuster most likely.

we need a change
Guest

i am done with dems acting like children when they don’t get their own way especially at the cost of such an important issue for women-human trafficking- and realistic support for abortion under defined appropriate terms. they are excessive and out of control at our expense.

Brendan
Guest

And what about the Republicans who deliberately sabotaged this bill by adding the abortion provision?
There’s plenty of blame to go around for both parties.

Deana Jones Slane
Guest

AND it covers “past history” experience where monies that should have been used for certain things are diverted to other things disproportionately or called things that they are not resulting in lengthy court battles or getting bogged down in congress trying to ‘fix it’.

we need a change
Guest
There is nothing wrong with the abortion provision. It covers reasonable extenuating circumstances. Why would taxpayers have to foot the bill for all abortions. I would rather pay for contraception. If in the end we have to pay for all abortions then it should be a limit of 1 bc abortion should not be used as a form of birth control in my opinion. Why do liberals even expect taxpayers to pay for just any abortions? So often these same ppl own $600 iPhones that comes with a $100 bill/month, they have tattoos and somehow have cash to spend on… Read more »
Brendan
Guest

This isn’t about poor people with iphones and tattoos… this isn’t even about tax payer money.

the bill, if it became a law, would create a fund to help assist women who were victims of sex trafficking… women who were forced into prostitution.
The money for this fund was not going to come from taxpayers.
The money for this fund was going to come from fines collected and assets seized of people convicted of sex trafficking.

Deana Jones Slane
Guest

Right, so keep onpoint and use it to HELP those women in positive, productive ways; make sure this legislation is not another avenue to continue to enslave women in a negtive lifestlye

we need a change
Guest

Yes for the human trafficking you are correct but there will be tax dollars also supporting that, too, which I am all for. Money from fines collected and assets seized should never be covering abortions unless it is from rape, incest etc..in this case related to the human trafficking.just as the bill lays out. The pro-abortionists want our tax dollars to pay for abortions and the Republicans are trying to protect the taxpayers from paying for abortions. That is the reality of the situation dude!

Brendan
Guest

Shame on both sides.
Shame on the Democrats for not reading the bill until this close to the vote… and not attempting to work this out.

…and shame on the Republicans for adding the abortion attachment as an obvious political maneuver to make the Dems look bad… at the expense of a bill that could have helped women being trafficked for sex.

More proof of how dysfunctional Washington DC is.
Politicians would rather score points against their opponents than to actually help people.