Did Republicans just lose moderate women?

[RandySF]

I have never seen so many women so angry at the Republicans in my entire life. Since they introduced legislation redefining rape, even women I know who voted for the GOP in November are fuming, FUMING. They are even angrier than the Anita Hill/Clarence Thomas days. Has anyone else seen this? Did the Republicans just lose the female vote in 2012?

[leftstreet]

1. I don't know anyone who's even heard of this

You must know some very up-to-the-minute informed people

[PDJane]

4. I'm Canadian.....

and I've heard of this. Women do know about this, if they're not listening to only Fox....

[H2O Man]

9. Odd.

I know many people who have heard about it, and who are outraged.

[leftstreet]

12. That's odd to me

I don't know many people into politics at all

:hi:

[CLANG]

2. I haven't seen it but it sure sounds good!

[JanBrady]

3. There are Democrats who support this legislation too. Not just Republicans.

[golddigger]

5. Hey the Brady Bunch!

[Sugarcoated]

13. Which Dems?

I'm sure it's not many, but name them.

[Tx4obama]

17. Who? Please post a link. n/t

[w8liftinglady]

20. see my post below..lists all who support

[Tx4obama]

21. Where in the list below do you see democrats, a quick glance all I see are republicans. n/t

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey (for himself, Mr. LIPINSKI, Mr. AKIN, Mr. ALEXANDER, Mr. AUSTRIA, Mrs. BACHMANN, Mr. BACHUS, Mr. BARLETTA, Mr. BARTLETT, Mr. BARTON of Texas, Mr. BENISHEK, Mr. BILIRAKIS, Mr. BISHOP of Utah, Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr. BONNER, Mr. BOUSTANY, Mr. BRADY of Texas, Mr. BROOKS, Mr. BROUN of Georgia, Mr. BUCHANAN, Mr. BURGESS, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. CANSECO, Mr. CARTER, Mr. CASSIDY, Mr. CHABOT, Mr. CHAFFETZ, Mr. COFFMAN of Colorado, Mr. COLE, Mr. CONAWAY, Mr. COSTELLO, Mr. CRAVAACK, Mr. CRAWFORD, Mr. CRENSHAW, Mr. CRITZ, Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky, Mr. DESJARLAIS, Mr. DIAZ-BALART, Mr. DONNELLY of Indiana, Mr. DUFFY, Mr. DUNCAN of South Carolina, Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee, Mrs. EMERSON, Mr. FITZPATRICK, Mr. FLAKE, Mr. FLEMING, Mr. FORBES, Mr. FORTENBERRY, Ms. FOXX, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Mr. GARDNER, Mr. GARRETT, Mr. GERLACH, Mr. GIBBS, Mr. GINGREY of Georgia, Mr. GOWDY, Ms. GRANGER, Mr. GRAVES of Missouri, Mr. GRIMM, Mr. GUTHRIE, Mr. HALL, Mr. HARPER, Mr. HARRIS, Mrs. HARTZLER, Mr. HENSARLING, Mr. HERGER, Mr. HUELSKAMP, Mr. HUNTER, Mr. HURT, Ms. JENKINS, Mr. JOHNSON of Illinois, Mr. JONES, Mr. JORDAN, Mr. KELLY, Mr. KING of New York, Mr. KING of Iowa, Mr. KINGSTON, Mr. KINZINGER of Illinois, Mr. KLINE, Mr. LAMBORN, Mr. LANDRY, Mr. LANKFORD, Mr. LATOURETTE, Mr. LATTA, Mr. LEE of New York, Mr. LOBIONDO, Mr. LONG, Mr. LUETKEMEYER, Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California, Mr. MANZULLO, Mr. MARCHANT, Mr. MARINO, Mr. MCCARTHY of California, Mr. MCCAUL, Mr. MCCLINTOCK, Mr. MCCOTTER, Mr. MCHENRY, Mr. MCINTYRE, Mr. MCKINLEY, Mrs. MCMORRIS RODGERS, Mrs. MILLER of Michigan, Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California, Mr. MILLER of Florida, Mr. MULVANEY, Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania, Mr. NEUGEBAUER, Mrs. NOEM, Mr. NUNNELEE, Mr. OLSON, Mr. PAUL, Mr. PENCE, Mr. PETERSON, Mr. PITTS, Mr. POMPEO, Mr. POSEY, Mr. PRICE of Georgia, Mr. RAHALL, Mr. RIBBLE, Mr. RIGELL, Mr. ROE of Tennessee, Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky, Mr. ROKITA, Mr. ROSKAM, Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN, Mr. ROSS of Arkansas, Mr. ROYCE, Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin, Mr. SCALISE, Mr. SCHILLING, Mrs. SCHMIDT, Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia, Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina, Mr. SENSENBRENNER, Mr. SHIMKUS, Mr. SHULER, Mr. SHUSTER, Mr. SIMPSON, Mr. SMITH of Texas, Mr. STUTZMAN, Mr. SULLIVAN, Mr. TERRY, Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania, Mr. TURNER, Mr. WESTMORELAND, Mr. WHITFIELD, Mr. WILSON of South Carolina, Mr. WOLF, Mr. WOODALL, Mr. YOUNG of Florida, Mr. GOHMERT, Mr. WITTMAN, Mr. CANTOR, Mr. BOREN, Mr. GOODLATTE, Mr. MCKEON, Mr. ROGERS of Michigan, Mr. CALVERT, Mrs. ELLMERS, Mr. ADERHOLT, Mr. TIBERI, and Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce and Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

[w8liftinglady]

23. the ones I see

http://www.lipinski.house.gov/
http://shuler.house.gov/

[Tx4obama]

25. So, out of that huge list you see TWO? Are you sure they're not DINOs? n/t

[w8liftinglady]

27. and Boren... BTW-I completely despise the bill.. and DINOs or no-they are co-sponsers

and Democrats..which the reps will use to say it's a bipartisan bill.
http://boren.house.gov/

[w8liftinglady]

28. costello ,donnely,mcintire ,peterson ,rahall,ross ... a better resource-lists parties

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h3/show

[JanBrady]

36. Thank you for posting this.

[Sonoman]

6. 'pubs have never had 'moderate women'....

their women are either Stepford, fools, or hookers.

Sonoman

[Enthusiast]

30. You got that right..nt

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[robinlynne]

8. one can hope.

[WhiteTara]

10. I don't know

but I certainly called my rep and Daniel Lipinski's office and told them both how terrible this is. So far, my rep (r-repuke) has NOT signed on. I'm watching closely.

[niyad]

26. called my local idiot (a co-sponsor, r, of course) and told him exactly what I thought of him, and

each and every person whose name is attached to that travesty. don't think I will be hearing back from him.

[WhiteTara]

34. and they have your number posted

above their phones so you will always go straight to voicemail. :rofl: oh wait, that's not funny.

[TheMadMonk]

11. More likely done now to get it over and done with prior to 2012 campaigns...

...begining. The fundies with an "almost victory" like should be emboldened to turn out for the Right come election day. And all these "pissed off housewives" will be happy enough at the bill's demise later in the process, that they will fail to pay attention to exactly how it died. 22 months is more than long enough to slip back into one's comfort zone.

[proud patriot]

14. I sure hope so

[ejbr]

15. Nah,

American women are apparently as stupid as American men who would vote against their economic interests. So, they will forget about this soon enough. They don't even connect the dots with the outlandish Supreme Court decisions and repigs.

[Liquorice]

16. I don't know how any one could support a politician who would even suggest

such a thing--man or woman. Republicans are truly rotten inside.

[w8liftinglady]

18. specific text on bill .. read at your leisure.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h112-3

To prohibit taxpayer funded abortions and to provide for conscience protections, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act’.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITING TAXPAYER FUNDED ABORTIONS AND PROVIDING FOR CONSCIENCE PROTECTIONS.

Title 1 of the United States Code is amended by adding at the end the following new chapter:

‘CHAPTER 4--PROHIBITING TAXPAYER FUNDED ABORTIONS AND PROVIDING FOR CONSCIENCE PROTECTIONS

‘SEC. 301. PROHIBITION ON FUNDING FOR ABORTIONS.

‘No funds authorized or appropriated by Federal law, and none of the funds in any trust fund to which funds are authorized or appropriated by Federal law, shall be expended for any abortion.

‘SEC. 302. PROHIBITION ON FUNDING FOR HEALTH BENEFITS PLANS THAT COVER ABORTION.

‘None of the funds authorized or appropriated by Federal law, and none of the funds in any trust fund to which funds are authorized or appropriated by Federal law, shall be expended for health benefits coverage that includes coverage of abortion.

‘SEC. 303. PROHIBITION ON TAX BENEFITS RELATING TO ABORTION.

‘For taxable years beginning after the date of the enactment of this section--

‘(1) no credit shall be allowed under the internal revenue laws with respect to amounts paid or incurred for an abortion or with respect to amounts paid or incurred for a health benefits plan (including premium assistance) that includes coverage of abortion,

‘(2) for purposes of determining any deduction for expenses paid for medical care of the taxpayer or the taxpayer’s spouse or dependents, amounts paid or incurred for an abortion or for a health benefits plan that includes coverage of abortion shall not be taken into account, and

‘(3) in the case of any tax-preferred trust or account the purpose of which is to pay medical expenses of the account beneficiary, any amount paid or distributed from such an account for an abortion shall be included in the gross income of such beneficiary.

‘SEC. 304. LIMITATION ON FEDERAL FACILITIES AND EMPLOYEES.

‘No health care service furnished--

‘(1) by or in a health care facility owned or operated by the Federal Government; or

‘(2) by any physician or other individual employed by the Federal Government to provide health care services within the scope of the physician’s or individual’s employment,

may include abortion.

‘SEC. 305. CONSTRUCTION RELATING TO SEPARATE COVERAGE.

‘Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as prohibiting any individual, entity, or State or locality from purchasing separate abortion coverage or health benefits coverage that includes abortion so long as such coverage is paid for entirely using only funds not authorized or appropriated by Federal law and such coverage shall not be purchased using matching funds required for a federally subsidized program, including a State’s or locality’s contribution of Medicaid matching funds.

‘SEC. 306. CONSTRUCTION RELATING TO THE USE OF NON-FEDERAL FUNDS FOR HEALTH COVERAGE.

‘Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as restricting the ability of any non-Federal health benefits coverage provider from offering abortion coverage, or the ability of a State or locality to contract separately with such a provider for such coverage, so long as only funds not authorized or appropriated by Federal law are used and such coverage shall not be purchased using matching funds required for a federally subsidized program, including a State’s or locality’s contribution of Medicaid matching funds.

‘SEC. 307. NON-PREEMPTION OF OTHER FEDERAL LAWS.

‘Nothing in this chapter shall repeal, amend, or have any effect on any other Federal law to the extent such law imposes any limitation on the use of funds for abortion or for health benefits coverage that includes coverage of abortion, beyond the limitations set forth in this chapter.

‘SEC. 308. CONSTRUCTION RELATED TO STATE OR LOCAL LAWS.

‘Nothing in this chapter or any other Federal law shall be construed to require any State or local government to provide or pay for any abortion or any health benefits coverage that includes coverage of any abortion.

‘SEC. 309. TREATMENT OF ABORTIONS RELATED TO RAPE, INCEST, OR PRESERVING THE LIFE OF THE MOTHER.

‘The limitations established in sections 301, 302, 303, and 304 shall not apply to an abortion--

‘(1) if the pregnancy occurred because the pregnant female was the subject of an act of forcible rape or, if a minor, an act of incest; or

‘(2) in the case where the pregnant female suffers from a physical disorder, physical injury, or physical illness that would, as certified by a physician, place the pregnant female in danger of death unless an abortion is performed, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself.

‘SEC. 310. APPLICATION TO DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

‘In this chapter:

‘(1) Any reference to funds appropriated by Federal law shall be treated as including any amounts within the budget of the District of Columbia that have been approved by Act of Congress pursuant to section 446 of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act (or any applicable successor Federal law).

‘(2) The term ‘Federal Government’ includes the government of the District of Columbia.

‘SEC. 311. NO GOVERNMENT DISCRIMINATION AGAINST CERTAIN HEALTH CARE ENTITIES.

‘(a) Nondiscrimination- A Federal agency or program, and any State or local government that receives Federal financial assistance (either directly or indirectly), may not subject any individual or institutional health care entity to discrimination on the basis that the health care entity does not provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions.

‘(b) Health Care Entity Defined- For purposes of this section, the term ‘health care entity’ includes an individual physician or other health care professional, a hospital, a provider-sponsored organization, a health maintenance organization, a health insurance plan, or any other kind of health care facility, organization, or plan.

‘(c) Remedies-

‘(1) IN GENERAL- The courts of the United States shall have jurisdiction to prevent and redress actual or threatened violations of this section by issuing any form of legal or equitable relief, including--

‘(A) injunctions prohibiting conduct that violates this section; and

‘(B) orders preventing the disbursement of all or a portion of Federal financial assistance to a State or local government, or to a specific offending agency or program of a State or local government, until such time as the conduct prohibited by this section has ceased.

‘(2) COMMENCEMENT OF ACTION- An action under this subsection may be instituted by--

‘(A) any health care entity that has standing to complain of an actual or threatened violation of this section; or

‘(B) the Attorney General of the United States.

‘(d) Administration- The Secretary of Health and Human Services shall designate the Director of the Office for Civil Rights of the Department of Health and Human Services--

‘(1) to receive complaints alleging a violation of this section;

‘(2) subject to paragraph (3), to pursue the investigation of such complaints in coordination with the Attorney General; and

‘(3) in the case of a complaint related to a Federal agency (other than with respect to the Department of Health and Human Services) or program administered through such other agency or any State or local government receiving Federal financial assistance through such other agency, to refer the complaint to the appropriate office of such other agency.

‘SEC. 312. HEALTH BENEFITS COVERAGE DEFINED.

‘In this chapter the term ‘health benefits coverage’ means the package of services covered by a managed care provider or organization pursuant to a contract or other arrangement.’.

This bill is very large, and loading it may cause your web browser to perform sluggishly, or even freeze. This is especially true for old and/or bad browsers. As an alternative you can download the PDF of the bill or read the text on THOMAS.
Continue on to the bill...

[Tx4obama]

22. Where in the list below do you see democrats, a quick glance all I see are republicans. n/t

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey (for himself, Mr. LIPINSKI, Mr. AKIN, Mr. ALEXANDER, Mr. AUSTRIA, Mrs. BACHMANN, Mr. BACHUS, Mr. BARLETTA, Mr. BARTLETT, Mr. BARTON of Texas, Mr. BENISHEK, Mr. BILIRAKIS, Mr. BISHOP of Utah, Mrs. BLACKBURN, Mr. BONNER, Mr. BOUSTANY, Mr. BRADY of Texas, Mr. BROOKS, Mr. BROUN of Georgia, Mr. BUCHANAN, Mr. BURGESS, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. CANSECO, Mr. CARTER, Mr. CASSIDY, Mr. CHABOT, Mr. CHAFFETZ, Mr. COFFMAN of Colorado, Mr. COLE, Mr. CONAWAY, Mr. COSTELLO, Mr. CRAVAACK, Mr. CRAWFORD, Mr. CRENSHAW, Mr. CRITZ, Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky, Mr. DESJARLAIS, Mr. DIAZ-BALART, Mr. DONNELLY of Indiana, Mr. DUFFY, Mr. DUNCAN of South Carolina, Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee, Mrs. EMERSON, Mr. FITZPATRICK, Mr. FLAKE, Mr. FLEMING, Mr. FORBES, Mr. FORTENBERRY, Ms. FOXX, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Mr. GARDNER, Mr. GARRETT, Mr. GERLACH, Mr. GIBBS, Mr. GINGREY of Georgia, Mr. GOWDY, Ms. GRANGER, Mr. GRAVES of Missouri, Mr. GRIMM, Mr. GUTHRIE, Mr. HALL, Mr. HARPER, Mr. HARRIS, Mrs. HARTZLER, Mr. HENSARLING, Mr. HERGER, Mr. HUELSKAMP, Mr. HUNTER, Mr. HURT, Ms. JENKINS, Mr. JOHNSON of Illinois, Mr. JONES, Mr. JORDAN, Mr. KELLY, Mr. KING of New York, Mr. KING of Iowa, Mr. KINGSTON, Mr. KINZINGER of Illinois, Mr. KLINE, Mr. LAMBORN, Mr. LANDRY, Mr. LANKFORD, Mr. LATOURETTE, Mr. LATTA, Mr. LEE of New York, Mr. LOBIONDO, Mr. LONG, Mr. LUETKEMEYER, Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California, Mr. MANZULLO, Mr. MARCHANT, Mr. MARINO, Mr. MCCARTHY of California, Mr. MCCAUL, Mr. MCCLINTOCK, Mr. MCCOTTER, Mr. MCHENRY, Mr. MCINTYRE, Mr. MCKINLEY, Mrs. MCMORRIS RODGERS, Mrs. MILLER of Michigan, Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California, Mr. MILLER of Florida, Mr. MULVANEY, Mr. MURPHY of Pennsylvania, Mr. NEUGEBAUER, Mrs. NOEM, Mr. NUNNELEE, Mr. OLSON, Mr. PAUL, Mr. PENCE, Mr. PETERSON, Mr. PITTS, Mr. POMPEO, Mr. POSEY, Mr. PRICE of Georgia, Mr. RAHALL, Mr. RIBBLE, Mr. RIGELL, Mr. ROE of Tennessee, Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky, Mr. ROKITA, Mr. ROSKAM, Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN, Mr. ROSS of Arkansas, Mr. ROYCE, Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin, Mr. SCALISE, Mr. SCHILLING, Mrs. SCHMIDT, Mr. AUSTIN SCOTT of Georgia, Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina, Mr. SENSENBRENNER, Mr. SHIMKUS, Mr. SHULER, Mr. SHUSTER, Mr. SIMPSON, Mr. SMITH of Texas, Mr. STUTZMAN, Mr. SULLIVAN, Mr. TERRY, Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania, Mr. TURNER, Mr. WESTMORELAND, Mr. WHITFIELD, Mr. WILSON of South Carolina, Mr. WOLF, Mr. WOODALL, Mr. YOUNG of Florida, Mr. GOHMERT, Mr. WITTMAN, Mr. CANTOR, Mr. BOREN, Mr. GOODLATTE, Mr. MCKEON, Mr. ROGERS of Michigan, Mr. CALVERT, Mrs. ELLMERS, Mr. ADERHOLT, Mr. TIBERI, and Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce and Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

[riderinthestorm]

35. 9 Dems.

Dan Boren, Jerry Costello, Mark Critz,Joe Donnelly,Daniel Lipinksi,Mike McIntyre, Nick Rahall, Mike Ross, and Heath Shuler.

9 too many. I can think of only one reason any man would change the definition of incest for example, from rape to consensual sex - and that's because they are rapists.

[ismnotwasm]

24. 'Pregnant female'

As opposed to what? Pregnant males?

Typical 'woman are barely human brood mares' legalese-babble bullshit

It's a disgusting bill. And yes women are pissed

[cally]

19. I'm getting emails from my apolitical family on this one

The word is getting out and women are angry and scared.

[AC_Mem]

29. How could anyone, but especially a woman

support this?

Ugh - of course, my state of Tennessee is well represented in this monstrosity.

God I hope America wakes up for 2012...

Annette

[deaniac21]

31. Why do they call legislation a bill? That in itself is sexist.

[SoCalDem]

32. nope

when push comes to shove, people who are inclined to vote "R", will continue to do so.

Most people do not even know what laws are proposed/passed, and probably could not name their own congressperson, or even know the name of the vice president, or could name even two SCOTUS justices.

By the time the next "vote-day" rolls around, the media will have filled their heads with so much trivia, they will probably vote for the one with the nicest smile, the best hair, or the tall one:(

[edhopper]

33. No

because the Dems are too damn stupid to make this an issue. While the GOP will continue to manufacture wedge non-issues and bludgeon the Dems with them.

[jimlup]

37. Never underestimate the capacity of Republicans to fuck themselves up

[bluestate10]

39. We are witnessing the religious right morphed into teabaggers.

My hope is this time voters that turned republicans out of office in 2006 and 2008 but voted for republicans in 2010 have learned their lesson and will help democrats bury republicans forever.

[SpiralHawk]

38. Republiconism = mysogyny

you can bet your bippy