Opinion

Democratic Governors Oppose Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Acts: ‘Not a Productive Use of Time’

|
Posted: Apr 27, 2019 3:21 PM
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not represent the views of Townhall.com.
Democratic Governors Oppose Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Acts: ‘Not a Productive Use of Time’

Source: (AP Photo/Stephan Savoia)

It’s been just over two months since the U.S. Senate failed to pass protections for babies born alive from abortion attempts. The U.S. House of Representatives is still attempting to even just have a vote, through a discharge petition, made necessary because leadership has blocked, dozens of times, a vote from taking place.

The act merely would have required abortion providers to provide the same level of care to a baby born alive from an abortion attempt as they would a baby born at that gestation. A mother could sue for damages if proper care was not utilized. As repeated many times by the bill’s sponsor, Republican Senator Ben Sasse of Nebraska, the bill would not have regulated or restricted abortion procedures. Such a bill should have been a slam-dunk. Yet all but three Democrats in the Senate voted against it. 

Not only did all senators running for president as Democrats vote against the bill, but so have non-senators running for the office. Some have even doubled-down on their opposition, as well as their support for late-term abortion. 

The bill is not an abortion one, and for media outlets and advocacy groups to categorize it as such, is media malpractice

State legislators outraged by the suggestion that babies born alive from abortion attempts should be left to die, have taken action. Unfortunately, the Democratic Party is so beholden to abortion, even failed abortions which result in live-births, that two Democratic governors have vetoed or said they would veto the legislation.

On April 18, North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper vetoed the legislation. “Laws already protect newborn babies, and this bill is an unnecessary interference between doctors and their patients,” the governor claimed in a statement. “This needless legislation would criminalize doctors and other healthcare providers for a practice that simply does not exist.” 

Such has been a popular talking point among those who oppose these legal protections. If laws already do exist, what’s wrong with strengthening them? Such was asked by Rep. Garland Pierce, a Democrat who voted for the legislation. “Even if someone thinks there are already laws in place for protection, how could this bill hurt,” he asked. 

Politicians and organizations opposed to such legislation like to pretend babies are not born alive and then left to die from abortions, though findings from a Congressional committeeCDC statisticspersonal testimonies, and abortion survivors who have told their stories provide proof it does happen. 

Though the GOP no longer has a supermajority in North Carolina, it’s worth noting that the bill had bipartisan support. Unlike the governor, Rep. Pierce was able to separate his feelings on abortion from those babies born alive. “I do not want to trample on women’s rights,” he said. “What got my attention is that once the baby has gone through the trauma of abortion and lives, I believe it should get medical care like any living being at that point, and not be denied medical assistance on its journey to live.” 

One of those medical professionals who testified to babies being left to die is Jill Stanek, a former nurse, whose story, according to the Christian Post, reportedly influenced Rep. Pierce’s vote. 

Meanwhile in Wisconsin, such legislation has not even come across Governor Tony Evers’ desk, though he has already vowed to veto it. Similarly to Governor Cooper, Governor Evers does not believe in the necessity of such a bill. 

“I think those protections already exist,” Governor Evers said in an interview, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. “We have all sorts of issues to deal with in the state of Wisconsin and to pass a bill that is redundant seems to be not a productive use of time. And clearly I ran on the belief — and I still believe — that women should be able to make choices about their health care. But this deals with a specific issue that's already been resolved.” 

Wisconsin Senate President Roger Roth, who co-authored the bill, said Governor Evers’ vow to veto means “he has gone farther to the extreme than I imagined.” Governor Evers meanwhile believes such bills were meant “to create division.”

The American voter looks to be in agreement with Republicans on this one. Opposing protections for babies born alive from abortions is at the Democrats’ folly. Governor Evers won with less than 50 percent of the vote, as did Governor Cooper. This becomes even more telling when a February poll from the Susan B. Anthony List shows 77 percent of voters support such legislation. Fifty-five percent strongly agree. Denying legal protections to truly the most innocent, defenseless, and vulnerable in society is unlikely to earn these Democratic politicians any more votes. 

For the 2018 elections, during which Governor Evers was elected, protection for babies surviving abortion attempts was not so much of a campaign issue, as was, say, immigration and healthcare. Should Evers and Cooper seek re-election however, they will be doing so with a record against babies who so desperately need medical care. President Trump and the GOP have rightfully called out the Democratic Party on their support for what ultimately amounts to infanticide.

While it is tragic to see how precious, newly born babies are denied their legal right to life in this country, it is possible our society will make Democrats answer for it, at the state and federal levels.