Dear Republicans: Focus On Jobs, Not Wombs
Although Congress has been in session for 280 days and Americans are desperate for them to take up legislation that will get the economy moving, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives is focused on one thing: Abortion.
Yesterday, Republicans passed the “Protect Life Act” aimed at—once again—prohibiting federal funding for abortion. Although federal money cannot be used to pay for abortions under existing law, yesterday’s bill would doubly restrict funding, and to the horror of many women, it goes a step further.
The “Protect Life Act,” which are many calling the “Let Women Die Act,” would not only make it illegal for women to use government subsidies to purchase insurance that includes abortion coverage (even if women paid for an abortion themselves), it would also allow hospitals to refuse to treat pregnant women seeking emergency abortions, even if their lives are at stake.
During the discussion of the bill, House Democrats–led by Representative Jackie Speier of California—chided Republicans for their disastrous proposal. Rep. Speier, who previously shared her experience getting a life-saving abortion, once again argued that the latest anti-abortion bill was not only unnecessary, but also misogynistic.
Rep. Speier said: “What my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are attempting to do is misogynist. It is absolutely misogynist.”
“This bill goes to the farthest extreme in trying to take women down, not just a peg, but to take in shackles to some cave somewhere,” Speier said. “Basically what this bill would do is say that any hospital could decline to provide services to one class of people in this country, and that one class of people are pregnant women.”
Since taking control of the House, Republicans have introduced 10 bills pertaining to abortion; however, they have yet to take up one jobs bill. Not one.
Although Republicans chided President Obama for the country’s dismal jobs numbers, and chanted “Jobs, jobs, jobs,” since rising to power in the 2010 midterm elections they have yet to tackle the economy, but rather have focused on social issues such as defunding Planned Parenthood, passing abortion bills that have no chance of becoming law, and preventing a millionaire’s surtax.
Despite the overwhelming majority of the country imploring Congress to pass jobs legislation, they have decided against it. After the President introduced his jobs bill—which borrowed popular ideas from both Republicans and Democrats—the GOP shot it down. Despite 62% of the country being in favor of President Obama’s bill, and 14 million people out of work, Republicans said no to jobs.
Yesterday, I tweeted Speaker John Boehner and asked what many have been wondering: Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs?!
Predictably, he didn’t respond, but his silence, and his Republican counterparts’ inactivity on the issue, speaks volumes. While it seems counterproductive to continue to allow the economy to tank, I’m beginning to buy into the idea that Congressional Republicans are trying to sabotage our nation’s economy on purpose.
Why else would Republicans completely ignore the American people’s call to act on jobs? Why would they turn down a payroll tax cut that many economists say would encourage hiring? Why would they turn down billions in infrastructure spending that would put many of their constituents back to work?
Two words: Barack Obama.
When the President was elected, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell said the “single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.” And there you have it.
Republicans don’t seem to be interested in deficit spending, because if they were, they would have stopped Pres. Bush years ago. Despite their rhetoric, they aren’t really about limiting the size of government, because if that were true they would keep their hands off of our wombs. And it’s becoming increasing clear they are not concerned with putting Americans back to work, because if that were so, they would pass the damn bill, or really roll up their sleeves and work with Democrats to create a piece of legislation both sides can live with.
No. Republicans want to defeat President Obama and they are willing to hold our futures and our wombs hostage in order to do so.
Do you think Republicans are trying to sabotage the economy on purpose? Why do you think they are focusing on abortions and not jobs?
22 Comments – Add Yours
Latest Articles
Most Popular This Week
Recent Comments
-
Rastaman on
Speaking from My Scars: Advice to Rihanna from a Survivor of Domestic Violence
I look at this case (Rihanna/Chris Brown), R Kelly, The pedophile pastor, Eddie Long and even the late Michael Jackson all in the way. ...
-
Mack1298 on
How High Is Your Sex Drive?
I am in my 40's and celibate by choice. I channel my sexual energy into what ever I can find to do. That includes exercise, knitting, my...
-
Kristen on
Speaking from My Scars: Advice to Rihanna from a Survivor of Domestic Violence
I see no resemblance between this and a woman getting pregnant by her rapist...
-
Falis on
Speaking from My Scars: Advice to Rihanna from a Survivor of Domestic Violence
Thanks for the feedback!
They will do anything to destroy this country. This is damned sad.
Excellent piece! Well written and plainly stated! We need to organize, mobilize and galvanize and speak on this as one voice, one sound. They (Republicans) stay on message! Republicans consistently focus on these ‘morality’ type issues instead of the substantial things that need to get done – healthcare, jobs, etc. And yes, I think they would rather run the country into the ground just to get Obama out of the White House. They are not hurting. And they are counting on people to vote for them.
Yes, this is crazy. I was watching Rachel Maddow the other night and she broke it all the way down.
I’m starting to think the GOP doesn’t want the economy to get better on purpose also. Why else would they do everything BUT try to get people working???
If it isn’t trying to bust up unions, or change voting laws, or going after abortion…what exactly are they doing?
I agree w/ Diana…we need to mobilize because this is some bullshhhh…
That bill is absolutely nuts
This bill sounds disastrous. I don’t understand how the party of small government can justify the intrusion into people’s personal lives.
It is not small government to tell a woman what she can and can not do with her body just like it is not small government to tell a person who they can and can’t marry.
just republicans being republicans……..what are you going to do about it?
I normally agree with Cutch online, but on this occassion, I have to say that the job plan is another probllem.
~Jobs can only be created by the private sector and not the public secor. How many stimulus plans has ~Obama tried and they all failed.
Because they took us back to the 70s with stagflation and Obama has never lifted the burden on the private sector. HE has piled the debt burden and I think that is no what is needed.
It is easy to get the economy going, cut taxes on businesses, deregulate the economy, but Obama will never do that because the Democrats hate free markets so much that they can never agree with that .
Obama never had an economic plan, he was always focused on who was avoiding taxes. Avoiding taxes is not illegal, in fact , income taxes might be unconstituttional.
Obama knows that the Repubicans can never agree with the plan. So he is hoping people wi blame them too for the probems.
Now that is sneaky, rather than useful.
Hah!
You see as a former mens rights advocate I always argued that men should have the right to legal abortions – and for that I was always roasted by pro-choice, pro child support and pro-imposing women’s reproductive choices on men, women.
Well this Bill is a step in the right direction to equalising the reproductive playing field.
I will only support women’s right to choose when men have the right to choose.
If the Republicans have it as goal to abolish abortion then they’ll get my support on that issue, too many poor young black men are jailed for child support default, which could be avoided if they were allowed to legally opt out fatherhood.
sorry.
Support men’s right to choose or you’re on your own and on our own everyone is weak.
Regarding the abortion as a political diversion to draw people’s attention away from jobs and the economy –
well
why does it have to be “either” “or”?
Both are important issues of enormous social impact and both should be top of the political agenda..
Furthermore I find it a bit rich that when I called for serious issues to be addressed in the One drop rule discusson
http://clutchmagonline.com/2011/10/support-1ne-drop-conversations-on-skin-color-race-identity/
I was roundly told to shut up.
Now you’re invoking those same serious issues to feign concern about jobs when all you really care about is preventing the attack on abortion.
Pure f uckry.
This society is rotten from top to bottom.
As usual you sound coo-coo for Coca Puffs. Seriously.
Men can opt out of fatherhood in various ways:
1) abstain from sex.
2) Use condoms (double up!) EVERY time they have sex
3) get a vasectomy
4) have sex only when married, or refer to # 1
“Well this Bill is a step in the right direction to equalising the reproductive playing field.”
How so?
And the “men should be able to force women to have abortions” thing is WEAK. NO ONE can force another grown person to do anything to their body. Period. What I look like telling a man to have a vasectomy because I don’t want to get preggo? Silly right? Same thing. I have options (the same i listed for you above).
Also, you mentioned child support payments. Let me ask you this…what do you think will happen to child support payments if abortions are more difficult to obtain? Hmmm….
Now, the article is valid (despite your issues w/ women).
The majority of Americans want Congress to focus on job, and yet…the Republicans are wasting EVERYBODY’S time with this b.s.
HI pg
LOL!
Agreed,
and in the name of EQUALITY we should limit women’s choice to contraceptive measures also. All the current post pregnancy and post birth means by which a woman may avoid parenthood should be abolished, including abortion, safe haven, adoption so that you can enjoy the same range of “choice options” you dictate for men – as follows:
1) abstain from sex.
2) Use condoms (double up!) EVERY time they have sex
3) get your tube tied
4) have sex only when married, or refer to # 1
I’m fine with that
not fine with one party being given all the options and the other getting all the blame.
if two people create a baby both should be FORCED to live with the consequences of their JOINT DECISION to have have sex.
You said:
And the “men should be able to force women to have abortions”
You’ll have to show me where i said that a man should be able to force a woman to have an abortion because I actually said the opposite – that a woman should NOT be able to impose fatherhood on an unwilling man.
I AM saying that abortion should be abolished so that women, just like men, are forced to live with the consequences of their decision to have sex.
Withdrawing my support for any “women’s right” until women start supporting other people rights.
Simple
Hope the Bill get passed and then I hope they press on to abolish the whole raft of women only programmes and “entitlement’s
or extend them to men.
Let’s have class equaliisation and gender equalty.
Abolish ALL priviledge.
Occupy the World.
add’
if two people create a baby, both should be FORCED to live with the consequences of their JOINT DECISION to have have sex.
or neither should be
You said: “I AM saying that abortion should be abolished so that women, just like men, are forced to live with the consequences of their decision to have sex.”
What are you talking about? Women already “deal with the consequences of their decision to have sex” and if we look at the stats of deadbeats (which includes many men who CLAIMED they wanted the child), the onus of the responsibility, or the “consequence” in your wording, is on them. When the father leaves, who raises the child more often than not? If that ain’t living with a consequence, I don’t know what is.
The argument that men & women should have the same contraception choices & that abortion should be illegal because…..it’s unfair for a woman to be able to choose to have an abortion is moot. Men can’t get pregnant, so CLEARLY, that is a major difference what each of us needs.
That’s like saying we’re going to abolish prostate exams because it’s not fair women can’t get them.
When men start getting pregnant & carrying babies, I’ll be on the front lines fighting for YOUR right to choose. Until then….stop with the fake inequality arguments.
@pg
“What are you talking about? Women already “deal with the consequences of their decision to have sex”
No they don’t
If a woman gets pregnant at an inconvenient time in her life she either aborts the pregnancy or carries the pregnancy to term and then gives the child up to safe haven or adoption. That is an avoidance of CONSEQUENCE that is not open to men.
Secondly, a woman who chooses to have and raise her child is NOT dealing with a consequence, she is fulflilling her DESIRE to have and raise a child.
“and if we look at the stats of deadbeats”
We will find that deadbeat mothers outnumber to the total number of child support defaulting fathers, despite the far greater number of men who have child support levied against them.
“The argument that men & women should have the same contraception choices & that abortion should be illegal because…..it’s unfair for a woman to be able to choose to have an abortion is moot. Men can’t get pregnant, so CLEARLY, that is a major difference what each of us needs.”
sigh – what nonsense.
Well ya might have a point here, if I was arguing that men be allowed to abort their “pregnancies”.
LOL!
smh
I’m not.
I’m arguing that men be allowed to LEGALLY cut all parental ties & dues for children they don’t want, in the same way that women are able to do with unwanted children. That would not infringe on women’s “right” to abort, adopt or ABANDON their new borns.
So what’s so threatening to you about letting men walk away when they want to, woman? What loss would you be suffering?
:-)
If men can’t walk away from unwanted children then women shouldn’t be able to either. How is it morally justifiable to let women walk away just because they carry the child? Once the child is born it is no longer a “my body, my choice” issue.
Please.
LOL!
“When men start getting pregnant & carrying babies, I’ll be on the front lines fighting for YOUR right to choose..”
Woman
you’d hate it if women ever lost the pregnancy ADVANTAGE over men, truss me. because you’d be losing the only leverage you have to make your claim for special treatment.
Here, Here Socially Maladjusted. Well Done!!!
-I HAD to leave the Liberal Democrats alone once I realized they cared little about men. We are ALWAYS important enough to criticize in BIG PUBLIC EVENTS LIKE FATHER’S DAY (3X’s). All you need to do is look at the spending breakdown for Democrats (Clinton, Obama and local Dems) along gender lines. Look it up! They’ve never given a Damn about their own Liberal men sooooo, I’ve 100 perc. for the Republicans from now on. I’ve had enough after the Father’s Day DISS.
As long as black men, and men/boys in general, have no Reproductive Rights and are constantly turned down for shared custody (again, look at the numbers of Sole Mother Custody victories). then womens Matriarchal privilege must be taken away. As long as black matriarchal women see us as the enemy, Imma treat them the same.
No more Matriarchal dominance and privilege while masses of black men are dissed by black women and ignored by Democrats.
To PGS?
as long as black women are focused exclusively on gender and maligning the opposite sex? There irresponsible killer man-hating WOMBS are on the table.
GO REPUBLICANS!!!!!
Black women/Women/Girls? Start and participate in a Hate Movement against me and the brothers and ALL MEN/BOYS?
It’s ON!!!
Great Job Socially!
They are SO obsessed with women’s uterus it’s insane. I will continue to fight them along wiith PPH.
Why is it so hard for you to believe that some people actually care for the innocent children?
When these “innocent children” grow up, pro-lifers become pro-death penalty and pro-war. All they stress is that an unborn life, a parasite, is more valuable than life outside of a womb. A life is a life is a life.
The republican party said they’d create jobs and the economy is still in shambles. Our quality of education is still very poor. These lives outside of the womb need stability and there’s no sign of that when our economy and quality of education are nothing to write home about. We used to have a superior education system but now our kids can’t even compete on a global stage.
People just hear “abortion” and lose their damned minds.
Absolutely disgusting for them to propose this. Our government is mainly composed of a bunch of old white men with out dated ideals on gender so of course they make it their mission to limit women’s rights.
I can respect those who are pro-life but putting a woman at risk of death just to save her unborn child is not any better. Somebody is still losing their life, so what’s the point? Oh wait, there isn’t one, except to control women.
To be honest, this is so one sided that I could scarcely call it journalism. Women need to respect their bodies by realizing that the repercussion of unprotected sex is pregnancy and if you’re not in a position to deal with the consequences in a humane way, maybe abstinence is the best option. What women today see as sexual freedom is really only freedom for men that leaves women asking themselves “is it to soon for sex” “will he still be interested in me after” “if I hold out, will he lose interest”. Having a baby is not like getting a tattoo. It effects another life. As far as life saving abortions go, I can’t understand why anyone would prohibit that, but honestly, the government on BOTH sides makes incomprehensible decisions all the time. These are politicians. But the fact that this story is so unprofessional and rhetorical disappoints me. Journalists (on both sides) should genuinely want to seek truth, learn, and get the whole story. be fair.
Elle,
Thank you for reading and responding.
A few things:
a. This isn’t “journalism,” it’s an opinion piece, which is common place in almost any publication (i.e. the NY Times Op-Eds).
b. This bill is not just aimed at women who don’t respect themselves (in your opinion). It’s aimed at ALL women–single, married, divorced, etc.–and can leave ANY of us dead on an emergency room floor.
Just like Congresswoman Speier said in the House, she had to undergo an abortion for a child she & her husband wanted because her life was in danger. This bill would allow hospitals to refuse EMERGENCY abortion treatment to a woman (even when their lives are at risk) simply because they don’t believe in abortion AND (unlike current law), they wouldn’t have to transfer the woman to another hospital that WOULD do the procedure. They’d simply be able to allow her to die because they didn’t believe in abortion. How is that far?
I say all this to say…again…WHERE IS THE JOBS BILL?
We can debate about abortion until the cows come home, but in the meantime, people are unemployed by the millions and our economy sucks. Congress doesn’t seem to be interested in that AT ALL.
Why not?
Britni,
Thank you for responding to me, but I don’t think you fully read my comment.
“As far as life saving abortions go, I can’t understand why anyone would prohibit that,”
Those are my words. “Life-saving abortions” are a completely different situation which I would think anyone would understand. It’s simply the fact that Rhetorical phrases such as “keep your hands off my womb” or suggesting that republicans have some obsession with hurting women are misleading and out of order. Pro-lifers aren’t concerned with defiling womanhood. I’m only trying to point out that while you target republicans for being unfocused on creating jobs, I think it’s more than fair to share the blame with Democrats. It’s obvious that America is unhappy with both parties. Despite what congress is or isn’t doing, I think the President should attempt to unite the country instead of crossing his arms and hatefully blaming republicans.
Why won’t he?
apples and oranges…