Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

factfinder_77

(841 posts)
Fri May 12, 2017, 12:41 AM May 2017

Sanders endorsed candidate voted to bar ACA from funding abortions, and requiring parental consent

For much of his first term, Mello’s positions were conventionally pro-life. In 2010, he voted to ban abortions after 20 weeks and to introduce new screening requirements. In 2011, he voted to bar the health exchanges set up under the Affordable Care Act from funding abortions; supported a ban on using telemedicine to perform abortions; and voted to change a parental-notification requirement to one requiring parental consent. All of these bills were opposed by Planned Parenthood—and, given the realities of Nebraska politics, all easily passed.

What’s more interesting is what happened next—and what didn’t. In 2012, Mello voted with Planned Parenthood on two out of three bills tracked by the group—and was excused from voting on the third. After that, Mello, who had become the influential chair of the state legislature’s budget committee, voted with Planned Parenthood 100 percent of the time. By 2015, the group was celebrating a “fourth straight year…without enacting any new abortion restrictions in Nebraska, thanks largely to committed women’s health advocates engaged in the legislative process.”


https://www.commondreams.org/views/2017/04/25/why-was-heath-mello-thrown-under-bus

Mello’s critics, including Hogue, are absolutely right to argue against any political calculus that involves selling out women’s rights—including the right to control their own body. And to oppose calls to “balance” those rights against some imaginary gain for the working class (as if women didn’t make up a majority of the working class). Americans tried that once with slavery—and it didn’t work out well. But no one has a right to use abortion, or Heath Mello, or the working people of Omaha—black, brown, and white—who see him as their champion, as pawns in some Democratic Party power game.

Like many of his supporters—including some of his most fervently pro-choice ones—Mello told me that he would like abortion to be a private matter between a woman and her partner, or her conscience. So long as women’s rights are under threat, that can’t happen. But when I ask Mello if, when he says he “will not restrict women’s reproductive care,” that includes abortions, he doesn’t equivocate: “Of course. I thought that was obvious.”
34 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Sanders endorsed candidate voted to bar ACA from funding abortions, and requiring parental consent (Original Post) factfinder_77 May 2017 OP
More on this, it's not that simple according to... uppityperson May 2017 #1
this is from last month and he lost the election JI7 May 2017 #2
When we are fighting for our lives against a coup d'etat, refighting last year's primary is very odd hedda_foil May 2017 #3
Why are you talking about the "primary"? No one Cha May 2017 #4
Oh come on, you know this is about the primary mythology May 2017 #19
Don't tell me what I know. The "silliness" is from Cha May 2017 #20
"Why would you be doing the enemy's work for him?" SunSeeker May 2017 #5
So you think this is a particularly good time to be fighting with each other? hedda_foil May 2017 #18
Again, a good question for Mello. Attacking abortion rights is fighting women. nt SunSeeker May 2017 #22
Hillary Clinton wanted a parental consent supporter a heartbeat away from the presidency. LeftyMom May 2017 #6
Nobody's "refighting the primary wars".. Heath Mello was Cha May 2017 #7
The thread title says it's about Sanders, because it is. LeftyMom May 2017 #8
BS has done a lot of things since the primary and yes Cha May 2017 #9
So is an anti-choicer going to do more harm as the mayor of a medium sized city, or VP? LeftyMom May 2017 #10
I'm not interested in rehashing the Mello-Kaine fights with you.. Cha May 2017 #12
+1 uponit7771 May 2017 #32
+1 QC May 2017 #15
+1 leftstreet May 2017 #21
+ 1,000,000 beam me up scottie May 2017 #26
LOL NurseJackie May 2017 #29
Well, an anti choicer who has a track record of sponsoring and VOTING for Ninsianna May 2017 #30
Halleluljah! Cha May 2017 #33
For all these people making these knee jerk attacks on Tim Kaine, not a single one Ninsianna May 2017 #34
Of course you completely neglect Bob Casey... moriah May 2017 #17
Funny melman May 2017 #11
K&R WellDarn May 2017 #13
Moot point. Mello lost. MineralMan May 2017 #14
I'm not sure this is moot WellDarn May 2017 #16
Post removed Post removed May 2017 #23
I see what you did there WellDarn May 2017 #24
Oh SNAP! beam me up scottie May 2017 #25
This message was self-deleted by its author riderinthestorm May 2017 #28
Beautiful. lostnfound May 2017 #27
Your concern is noted. n/t ms liberty May 2017 #31

JI7

(89,247 posts)
2. this is from last month and he lost the election
Fri May 12, 2017, 12:52 AM
May 2017

although i think he would have lost anyways.

mayor races are usually more about local matters which are not always very partisan.

hedda_foil

(16,373 posts)
3. When we are fighting for our lives against a coup d'etat, refighting last year's primary is very odd
Fri May 12, 2017, 01:29 AM
May 2017

Why would you be doing the enemy's work for him?

Cha

(297,180 posts)
4. Why are you talking about the "primary"? No one
Fri May 12, 2017, 02:04 AM
May 2017

else is. This is about Heath Mello. He wasn't in the gd primary.

Why are you accusing the OP of "doing the enemies work for them"

 

mythology

(9,527 posts)
19. Oh come on, you know this is about the primary
Fri May 12, 2017, 10:19 AM
May 2017

Don't be disingenuous. This silliness needs to stop.

Cha

(297,180 posts)
20. Don't tell me what I know. The "silliness" is from
Fri May 12, 2017, 10:26 AM
May 2017

from those who try to deflect from the issues by throwing the word "primary" around.

SunSeeker

(51,550 posts)
5. "Why would you be doing the enemy's work for him?"
Fri May 12, 2017, 02:44 AM
May 2017

Good question for Mello regarding his ACA abortion vote.

And we are not "facing a coup d'etat." That already happened on Novemer 8 when the presidency was stolen from the popular vote winner.

LeftyMom

(49,212 posts)
6. Hillary Clinton wanted a parental consent supporter a heartbeat away from the presidency.
Fri May 12, 2017, 03:03 AM
May 2017

If you're going to refight the primary wars in defiance of the board rules can you please do so with honesty and consistency?

Thanks.

PS Kaine loves abstinence education too.

Edit: Oh yeah, and "informed consent" laws that involves lying to women about imaginary consequences of abortion, a mandatory ultrasound that exists for slut shaming and not for safety (we know this is the case because rape victims are exempt) and a mandatory waiting period.

LeftyMom

(49,212 posts)
10. So is an anti-choicer going to do more harm as the mayor of a medium sized city, or VP?
Fri May 12, 2017, 03:25 AM
May 2017

I have a memory that lasts longer than six months and I seem to recall a lot of people who are all about women's rights and party purity now telling people who objected to the Kaine pick based on his anti-choice views to STFU and let the pragmatic, reasonable people talk.

I also recall that an awful lot of those same people were really, really hostile to LGBT rights not all that long ago.

So yeah, getting really tired of this bullshit.

Cha

(297,180 posts)
12. I'm not interested in rehashing the Mello-Kaine fights with you..
Fri May 12, 2017, 03:30 AM
May 2017

Only that you quit trying to pin it on "refighting the primaries".

QC

(26,371 posts)
15. +1
Fri May 12, 2017, 09:41 AM
May 2017

Honestly, some mornings I come here and see the primary rehashing going full speed and wonder if maybe Trump resigned during the night and no one has told me yet.

Ninsianna

(1,349 posts)
30. Well, an anti choicer who has a track record of sponsoring and VOTING for
Fri May 12, 2017, 04:59 PM
May 2017

extreme right wing anti-choice legislation is going to do more harm than someone who might have been anti-choice personally but who never sponsored or voted to impose those personal beliefs onto women.

Does that memory extend to anything that might make the two equivalent in anyway? I don't seem to recall the people you are attacking being in any way equivalent to Mello and his LEGISLATIVE and VOTING record. What I'm seeing right now, and my memory extends to the past two weeks is people who were all about purity and being the very epitome of "progressive" perfection were screeching about pragmatism was evil and that one must be 100% pure period, and for everyone else to STFU.

I recall that these same purity folks really didn't mind about hostility to LGBT rights, as long as they came the pure ones, so perhaps the bullshit that's so tiring is coming from those who seem to vacillate from one extreme to another all the while proclaiming how their own purity somehow should and must be ignored, that false equivalency is just fine and that extremely rabid anti-choicers sponsoring and voting for legislation that seeks to BAN abortion just when it's medically necessary, targets and harms women who are poor and in rural and underserved areas, and who sign onto letters begging for the Keystone Pipleline are somehow pure if the anointed ones say so.

I think we're all tired of the lies, the vacillation and pure bullshit, enough with the lies and the attacks on Democrats who have been the ones making the actual progress on LGBT and Women's rights, while the pure ones have no problem with sacrificing them on the altar of purity. When states rights trump LGBT rights and women's basic human rights are not worth of protection, proclaiming purity is pure bullshit, attacking Democrats whose records disprove these lies is even more so.

If the bullshit is as tiring as it's tiresome, then I'd suggest that to spare us all, people should stop piling it up in these divisive, toxic comments that are not reality or fact based. I understand the need to "defend" one's favorite candidate from imagined attacks, but doing so by slinging BS at Democrats by LYING about their record or defending huge mistakes by once again LYING about their record, is not how a reasonable or legitimate way to do so. There is a reason that both lying and false equivalency are fallacies of argument, and more often the tools used by the right wing and others who have no actual argument to back them up.

Mello is simply not equivalent to Kaine, and Hillary's track record throughout her career is impeccable in terms of human rights to suggest otherwise is to be deliberately dishonest. We had enough of these lies, we've been tired of that bullshit for decades now.

Ninsianna

(1,349 posts)
34. For all these people making these knee jerk attacks on Tim Kaine, not a single one
Mon May 15, 2017, 02:10 PM
May 2017

can produce any legislation where he attempted to force his personal viewpoints on anyone at all. He's free to make any decision he'd like about his own uterus, the problem comes when, like Heath Mello and his fellow rabid anti-choicers, try to block women from accessing needed medical procedures because his uneducated and rather sadistic beliefs require that women suffer and die due to made up propaganda of the extreme right wing, rather than what the doctors are telling you.

ACOG (the OB/GYN group) states specifically that the things Mello was trying to push into law are DANGEROUS to women. These two men are not equivalent neither are their records. This was a blunder by Bernie and if this is what Kleeb and their Revolution is all about, they can go take a powder, because Democrats will not put up with this BS.

Nebraska apparently has an utter failure and an unreliable person in their Democratic chair, they already have a hard battle in a red state, they're going to need all the help they can get. I hope that their local Indivisible, Resistance and Emerge groups are on the ball, and we'll need to check in periodically to ensure they're getting all the help they can get, from the DNC and Democrats around the country who are paying close attention to what's going on. We can't let poor leadership and the abandonment of core issues stand, simply because people have infiltrated our grassroots with questionable commitments to core beliefs.

moriah

(8,311 posts)
17. Of course you completely neglect Bob Casey...
Fri May 12, 2017, 09:52 AM
May 2017

.... if we're going to talk about Democratic pro-life Senators.

My "litmus test" for any candidate about to have a role in forming, voting, or signing legislation is that they agree to uphold Roe v Wade regardless of personal beliefs. Casey used the fact Obama was going to veto the attempted federal 20-week ban to give a "protest vote" for cloture (the Repukes never took it to a vote on the bill itself knowing that it'd be vetoed), Kaine refused because there was no adequate and enforceable health exception under Roe, even if he could have showboated like Casey did.

At least Casey, so far, is sticking with the caucus when it counts, regarding the Mexico City policy.

I don't mind people having personal opinions. I like that the Dems like that, like Casey, aren't the hypocritical "anti-choice" view, of "pro-life", but want to reduce economic reasons for abortions as well as increase family planning (his call for that was roundly rejected by the GOP of course, because sluts who get pregnant shouldn't get to complete an education in their world). So long as they hold to Roe, I'm going to not have to hold my nose *terribly* hard. I still might vomit if the only way to get Tom Cotton out of Arkansas is to vote for a Democrat who says they won't screw with first-trimester abortions, but feel Roe allows some restrictions in the 2nd trimester. But I know I'd vote for the Dem.

 

melman

(7,681 posts)
11. Funny
Fri May 12, 2017, 03:28 AM
May 2017

how all the same people that say how terrible this is that Sanders endorsed Mello...

also think it was terrible that Bernie's endorsement(supposedly) hurt him.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=9051066

Curious indeed.

 

WellDarn

(255 posts)
16. I'm not sure this is moot
Fri May 12, 2017, 09:47 AM
May 2017

Every day we see another OP flaming Sanders for his endorsement of Mello. Most of those OPs have a hundred or more replies attacking, often personally, anyone who suggests that Mello's [past] position on choice is no reason to not vote for the Democrat in the race. Every one of those OPs had multiple replies accusing "leftists" of being anti-female.

When we get to the point where we are having honest and accurate discussions about Mello, Sanders, and the "left" in general instead of constant vilification for contrived "offenses" against moderates' idea of a progressive agenda, maybe then this subject can be called moot.

Response to factfinder_77 (Original post)

Response to beam me up scottie (Reply #25)

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Sanders endorsed candidat...