Letter: What is the FOCA?

health care providers, clinics, and hospitals only are "forced" to do those things if they wany government funding. they certainly have the CHOICE not to do those things and not to accept government funding.

• Upvote 0
• Posted by missmia on January 29, 2009 at 9:21 a.m.
• permalink
• suggest removal

Letter: What is the FOCA?

missmia: Isn't that an inappropriate use of federal funding?

Why should the federal government be allowed to coerce an industry into doing something by withholding funding that would otherwise be available in the free market? How is that remotely Constitutional? If the government feels the need to make mandates on the healthcare industry it obviously has too much money and should return some of it back to the taxpayers.

Remember: The government does not pay for or provide for anyone. WE do.

• Upvote 0
• Posted by connerm on January 29, 2009 at 10:16 a.m.
• permalink
• suggest removal

Letter: What is the FOCA?

If your conscience tells you abortion is wrong you would probably not be working at a family planning clinic. Being a doctor or a nurse is far more iffy as they want to help more patients than those who want abortions. If they quit all their patents would be left in the lurch. If I felt that strongly about it I would refuse to perform the medical procedure and take the consequences. WE elect Senators and Representatives who serve in Congress and make the laws. Federal laws apply to all the states. This is the United States of America.

• Upvote 0
• Posted by irishswearingen on January 29, 2009 at 10:49 a.m.
• permalink
• suggest removal

Letter: What is the FOCA?

This is true, but there are limits to federal power, Irishswearingen. Federal laws addressing abortion are unconstitutional, therefore federal mandates addressing it are unconstitutional.

It is not legal to surrender tax money and use it as bait for something that the law cannot touch.

• Upvote 0
• Posted by connerm on January 29, 2009 at 10:55 a.m.
• permalink
• suggest removal

Letter: What is the FOCA?

Advocates of this bill here are missing the bigger picture. In the haste to defend the option of having an abortion, pro-choicers are making the argument for a bigger government. In Roe. vs. Wade pro-choice proponents said the government didn't have the right to look into my personal life therefore it couldn't make decisions about it.

Now you are saying the opposite, the government has the right to look into doctors' practices and tell them what they can and cannot do. The government can, by extension of knowing a daughter is pregnant (exactly what pro-choicers fought to keep them from knowing before), keep a parent from making a medical decision about his or her own child.

This is unbelievably scary ground. Our country is handing the government more power and reach at an alarming rate.

• Upvote 0
• Posted by Abita on January 29, 2009 at 12:41 p.m.
• permalink
• suggest removal

Letter: What is the FOCA?

Linguo says:

"I don't see why Federal laws concerning abortion are unconstitutional...please explain."

Federal laws concerning abortion are unconstitutional because the Constitution does not address abortion as an area that Congress has a right to legislate over. If it's not in the enumerated powers, it goes to the states. When discussing constitutional law it does not suffice to say "I don't see anything about __ in here, that means Congress can legislate over it." One must prove that the Constitution addresses the issue and gives power to the legislative branch to deal with it.

Federal highway mandates are legal because roads are a direct piece of infrastructure whose purpose is intra and interstate commerce (an enumerated power.)

On the other hand, withholding funding for private companies and non-profits with a mandate is a very severe precedent because it implies that the government has a right to give mandates to whatever industry it wants. Since the government is authorized to levy as many taxes as necessary to fulfill its duties and this could be construed as a duty, it implies that the government can virtually take over any industry it wants via taxation and mandates.

This is coming from a pro choice perspective, mind you. I think the decision to have an abortion or not should be between the doctor and patient, but it is not up to the federal government. Thus I believe Roe v. Wade and ANY piece of legislation at the federal level having to do with abortion is illegal (bans and limits included.)

• Upvote 0
• Posted by connerm on January 29, 2009 at 5:20 p.m.
• permalink
• suggest removal

Letter: What is the FOCA?

I have another question. Could a doctor be sued for refusing to perform a procedure that a patient demanded? Could he/she inform the patient that they will not do so and refuse to see them from that point on? Pharmacists I would see from a slightly different standpoint because they are there to dispense pills when they get a script from the doctor. What would give them the right to pick and choose? Based on what? I admit that I am not familiar with the details of the Constitution, but I am going to give it a look over, now that my curiosity has been stimulated.

• Upvote 0
• Posted by irishswearingen on January 30, 2009 at 10:17 a.m.
• permalink
• suggest removal

Letter: What is the FOCA?

"where does the new bill say anything about stopping free speech for doctors? Where does it say anything about states have to allow partial birth abortion? "

It all depends on how broadly the bill is interpreted. If history is any guide, any time a bill spells out your right to sue responsible parties if you feel your rights are being "infringed" we'll probably see individuals or organizations using the legal system to challenge every abortion restricting law in the country, including partial birth abortion and parental notification laws. The fact that abortion is a recognized right everywhere in the country courtesy of Roe v Wade and yet congress still feels the need to address what it calls "possible reversal or further erosion by the Supreme Court of the right" makes me a little nervous, but then again, I've always felt the federal government has been in the business of overextending its powers for a while. The minimum drinking age being one of the most visible here.

• Upvote 0
• Posted by em1 on January 30, 2009 at 11:09 a.m.
• permalink
• suggest removal

Letter: What is the FOCA?

If I were the author, my name would be elperst on here. My name is Mike Conner and I'm a graduate student. I do not believe in anonymous commentary on a forum like this. If you had read my comment you would have noted that I am also pro-choice which is at odds with the individual who wrote the article. Pro-choice legislation cannot come from the federal government, it is up to the States no matter how convenient it would be for the pro-choice lobby to lobby one federal government instead of 50 individual governments. This is an unfortunate situation in my opinion, but it is what it is. If we do not apply the Constitution when making laws, we are no longer a constitutional republic. No exceptions.

ANYWAYS,

14th Amendment, section 1: "Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. "

-The purpose and intention of the 14th Amendment is to guarantee Constitutional rights to slaves and their descendants. The important part of the text is the area I placed within the asterisks as far as due process goes (due process being the application of ALL enumerated constitutional rights to all citizens.) The 14th amendment does not create NEW rights, but causes the Bill of Rights to apply to state governments as well.

The Bill of Rights does not address abortion, therefore the 14th amendment does not authorize abortion legislation restrictions on the States.

I don't care about the facts of the bill because I think it's unconstitutional in the first place. Equally unconstitutional are federal restrictions on abortion. The bill's sponsors note in the text that their constitutional justification is through "interstate commerce," meaning that Congress has the right to legislate on abortion because some women cross state borders to get them. This precedent should not stand up in court because it establishes an absurd precedent similar to the one I gave above having to do with mandates for private industry.

You assumed that the Supreme Court would not rule unless it thought something was a federal issue. This is not true, the Supreme Court takes on the cases it chooses every year because they have been appealed to the highest level. It is sometimes the case that these issues only apply to individual states. Not only that, but some Supreme Court justices interpret the Constitution more...liberally...than others.

My apologies for the length.

• Upvote 0
• Posted by connerm on January 30, 2009 at 12:58 p.m.
• permalink
• suggest removal

Letter: What is the FOCA?

Mike, no need to apologize. You are right. I should apologize for taking the short and easy way out and giving my opinion instead of what is actually law. But, then, I am thinking that President is an expert on Constitutional Law, or at least that is what he writes in The Audacity of Hope. I'm getting confused here. Okay I am going to see if I can find the text for FOCA on the Internet and get back to you. But, thank you for your comment.

• Upvote 0
• Posted by irishswearingen on January 31, 2009 at 10:49 a.m.
• permalink
• suggest removal

Letter: What is the FOCA?

Okay, I'm back. Here it is. Freedom of Choice Act (Introduced in House) HR 1964 IH
(3) In 1965, in Griswold v. Connecticut (381 U.S. 479), and in 1973, in Roe v. Wade (410 U.S. 113) and Doe v. Bolton (410 U.S. 179), the Supreme Court recognized that the right to privacy protected by the Constitution encompasses the right of every woman to weigh the personal, moral, and religious considerations involved in deciding whether to begin, prevent, continue, or terminate a pregnancy. (4) The Roe v. Wade decision carefully balances the rights of women to make important reproductive decisions with the State's interest in potential life. Under Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, the right to privacy protects a woman's decision to choose to terminate her pregnancy prior to fetal viability, with the State permitted to ban abortion after fetal viability except when necessary to protect a woman's life or health. (14) Congress has the affirmative power under section 8 of article I of the Constitution and section 5 of the 14th amendment to the Constitution to enact legislation to facilitate interstate commerce and to prevent State interference with interstate commerce, liberty, or equal protection of the laws. (15) Federal protection of a woman's right to choose to prevent or terminate a pregnancy falls within this affirmative power of Congress, in part, because-- (A) many women cross State lines to obtain abortions and many more would be forced to do so absent a constitutional right or Federal protection; (B) reproductive health clinics are commercial actors that regularly purchase medicine, medical equipment, and other necessary supplies from out-of-State suppliers; and (C) reproductive health clinics employ doctors, nurses, and other personnel who travel across State lines in order to provide reproductive health services to patients. (a) Statement of Policy- It is the policy of the United States that every woman has the fundamental right to choose to bear a child, to terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability, or to terminate a pregnancy after fetal viability when necessary to protect the life or health of the woman. (b) Prohibition of Interference- A government may not-- (1) deny or interfere with a woman's right to choose-- (A) to bear a child; (B) to terminate a pregnancy prior to viability; or (C) to terminate a pregnancy after viability where termination is necessary to protect the life or health of the woman; or (2) discriminate against the exercise of the rights set forth in paragraph (1) in the regulation or provision of benefits, facilities, services, or information.

• Upvote 0
• Posted by irishswearingen on January 31, 2009 at 11:03 a.m.
• permalink
• suggest removal

Letter: What is the FOCA?

By the way, Irish, the unkindly toned portion of my comment was directed towards Linguo, not you. You're generally pretty thoughtful on here!

• Upvote 0
• Posted by connerm on February 3, 2009 at 1:01 a.m.
• permalink
• suggest removal

Letter: What is the FOCA?

Thank you for writing this article! You are absolutely right, and everyone should hear this message.

• Upvote 0
• Posted by Rawleigh on February 3, 2009 at 7:16 a.m.
• permalink
• suggest removal

Letter: What is the FOCA?

What if the courts were loaded with people with a political agenda? Why do liberals argue against socially conservative justices and conservatives argue against liberal justices? Common now...Don't appeal to authority so easily. Argue with me on why YOU think it's Constitutional and I will respond on why I think you're right or wrong.

• Upvote 0
• Posted by connerm on February 3, 2009 at 5:15 p.m.
• permalink
• suggest removal