Wednesday, March 05, 2008

Did Obama Actually Vote For Infanitide?

I finally came across the hard facts concerning Obama's voting record on the protection of infants here.


IL Senate 2001

* Senate Bill 1095, Born Alive Infant Protection Act
* Voted "no" in the Senate Judiciary Committee (March 28, 2001)
* Argued against the bill on the IL Senate floor (March 30, 2001)
* Voted "present" for the bill (March 30, 2001)


IL Senate 2002

* Senate Bill 1662, Born Alive Infant Protection Act
* Voted "no" vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee (March 6, 2002)
* Argued against the bill on the IL Senate floor (April 4, 2002)
* Voted "no" for the bill (April 4, 2002)


IL Senate 2003

* Senate Bill 1082, Born Alive Infant Protection Act
* Obama, who chaired the Health and Human Services Committee, held the bill from receiving a committee vote and stopped the senator sponsor from adding the federal act's clarification paragraph, which made the bills absolutely identical.

I wanted to clear this up as I had heard conflicting stories such as "he only voted present" and "he pushed the wrong button" (yes, I actually heard that!) You can also read the top ten reasons Obama has given for opposing the act here.
Here is a moving open letter to Obama concerning this issue.

Here is a short article by Rick Santorum on the issue.

I am thankful for the Internet in that the truth can be fully disclosed. But the truth can also be so scary that I can almost wish I was ignorant. I wish we didn't have a presidential candidate with that kind of morals, I wish he had really pushed the wrong button. To quote Obama, I wish for a country “filled with hope and possibility for all Americans,” even for small, helpless Americans.

2 comments:

Nick said...

This is off the top of my head, so I may not be 100% correct (someone please correct me if I'm wrong), but the Born Alive Infants Protection Act was actually a federal law. Obama, who was only a state senator at the time, therefore, could not vote on it. Rather, the controversy over Obama's votes concern a parallel law, the "Induced Infant Liability Act," that was proposed in the Illinois state legislature, and I believe your summary of his votes is correct on that.

Basically, the BAIPA (the federal law) requires hospitals to provide medical care to infants "accidentally" born alive during an abortion, but states that the law should not be (judicially) construed to run contrary to Roe v. Wade. In other words, the law was carefully construed to avoid attack on the grounds that it could be construed to prohibit all abortions and was therefore inconsistent with Roe. The IILA did not contain such a caveat in it.

Obama claims that while he opposed the IILA, because the IILA could be interpreted to ban all abortions (or so he argued), he supported the BAIPA. But what you say about his not allowing the IILA's sponsors to therefore add the clarification language, thus making it identical to the BAIPA, if it's true, belies his explanation. Not to mention that the argument that either act would prohibit all abortions is disingenuous (but I won't go into that).

joshMshep said...

Hey Chris,
You can see Obama's full record at this very helpful website:

OnTheIssues.org

I also wrote about his candidacy recently at my blog

Long story short, he's sure not getting my vote.

peace,
-joshMshep