Murtha is as anti-choice as they come...you all knew that, right?

[Clarkie1]

Abortion Issues
(Back to top)


2006 Representative Murtha supported the interests of the Planned Parenthood 0 percent in 2006.

2005-2006 Representative Murtha supported the interests of the National Right to Life Committee 70 percent in 2005-2006.

2005 Representative Murtha supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 0 percent in 2005.

2004 Representative Murtha supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 0 percent in 2004.

2003-2004 Representative Murtha supported the interests of the National Right to Life Committee 91 percent in 2003-2004.

http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=H3460103




So tell me DU....how do you feel about our new "majority leader" now?

[Erika]

1. Isn't he your leader also, or what?

He'll follow Pelosi.

[Clarkie1]

2. I just posted this because I'm not sure many on DU are aware Murtha is very conservative

on social issues. I'm interested in gauging the response. I'm also concerned with the bribery scandal.

[Erika]

4. Many Democrats are very conservative

The liberal vs conservative battle is only a D.C. myth.

[Exiled in America]

27. Yeah and its a shame too.

[LittleClarkie]

6. I'm concerned about the rollercoaster that is DU

We love him, we hate him, we love him, we hate him. Hurk!

[Clarkie1]

9. This information is new to me as of today.

I did not know about his anti-choice postions or pro-NRA postitions until today. I've also learned about his tainted past..."well, I won't take that bribe now" (paraphrasing).

It bugs me, and I have been disappointed to learn these things.

[LittleClarkie]

24. Some here tend to fall in love with anyone who advocates withdrawl

from Iraq. Sometimes that's all it takes. Sorry, didn't mean to catch you in the crossfire. It's just how DU operates sometimes that gets me. It's "love first and ask questions later" when someone shows some backbone against the administration.

Even so, isn't it weird that these revelations re: Murtha's past are coming out now, and not when he was busy advocating exit from Iraq a few months ago. I must say the timing bugs me.

[MADem]

29. Did you know he voted AGAINST BANNING gay adoption in DC?

Or that he has a 91 percent rating by the National Education Assn? Or that he voted FOR Kyoto, yet against stopping drilling in ANWR?

His record is a mixed bag. See the link I provided elsewhere in this thread for his stance on all the issues.

[Erika]

11. DU does not have a far right wing mindset.

We have differing opinions.

[LittleClarkie]

14. Where did I say that.?

But our opinion of someone can turn on a dime.

[Syrinx]

19. the bribery scandal in which he didn't take any bribes?

[Clarkie1]

21. In which he said "I'm not interested....now" nt

[Syrinx]

25. USA Today article on Murtha

He declared he was innocent, saying he had "met with two men who I believed had a substantial line of credit that could provide up to 1,000 jobs for the district. I broke no law. I took no money." A grand jury and the House ethics panel cleared Murtha of any wrongdoing.

The liberal Americans for Democratic Action gave Murtha's 2003 voting record 85 points out of 100; the American Conservative Union gave him 33 points.

Not that he is perfect in my opinion. You point out that he is "pro-life." Further...

In 1993, he authored legislation to restore prayer in public schools. "Religion is part of America's history, part of America's strength and, for most of us, part of our daily lives," Murtha said in a statement.

http://asp.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/CandidateProfile.aspx?ci=462&oi=H

[Rainscents]

3. I was thinking the same.

[Erika]

8. Most Dems are pro-life

They just seek social help to stop abortions. The GOP want to hammer the female with anti abortion laws punitive against the female.

[Clarkie1]

12. But most aren't for banning family planning.

Voted YES on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad. (May 2001)


http://www.ontheissues.org/PA/John_Murtha.htm

[Erika]

15. Pelosi will rule

No doubt in my mind.

[maddezmom]

16. I think most dems are pro-choice

:)

[Clarkie1]

17. It's a fact. nt

[Hippo_Tron]

5. I don't want Hoyer or Murtha

But Pelosi will bark orders at Murtha and Murtha will take them because he's a Pelosi loyalist. Hoyer will use his position to be in a place to challenge Pelosi and I certainly don't want that.

Both are bad options but Murtha is better than Hoyer.

[flyarm]

10. Hippo_Tron ..I AGREE!! N/T

[Erika]

13. And Pelosi will rule

New age, guys. Live with it.

[Alexander]

37. Completely agree with what you said.

If we wanted the best candidate I think David Obey would be the one.

But the powers-that-be seem to have whittled it down to Hoyer and Murtha. Neither one appeals to me, but we don't need posturing and infighting coming off the wave of our first victory in almost a decade.

[lostnfound]

46. Well put. nt

[PVnRT]

48. I agree with your title

but what's going to happen when some abortion rights bill makes it through Judiciary? You think Johnny is going to just bring it up without objection? Or without cashing in some favors?

Sure, I hope he does take his orders from Pelosi, but power does funny things to politicians' heads.

[fhqwhgads]

61. out of curiosity...

...why exactly is murtha a pelosi loyalist? while they're on the same side regarding the war, there's no doubt that nancy pelosi has strong progressive credentials while john murtha's more of a mixed bag. is it because of murtha's strong stance on the war?

i guess what i'm really asking is - does anyone know if they'd worked together on things or established a good relationship prior to the war? like i said, just curious.

[flyarm]

7. and Hoyer partnered up with rethugs for HAVA!! AND K STREET N/T

[gulfcoastliberal]

20. And took 11K from Abramoff... nt

[azurnoir]

30. Directly from Abramoff?

Or from Native American tribes he represented?

[gulfcoastliberal]

38. From the tribes...

http://www.capitaleye.org/abramoff_recips_detail.asp?type=R&Name=Steny+H%2E+Hoyer+%28D%2DMd%29

[upi402]

18. so *NOW* there are DUers worried about DINO's?

LOL /jk

Seems like we need a flame retardant suit to say anything fact-based about a Dem being a Republican in reality.

Anyhow, if y'all need me I'll be on my post-election honeymoon. I'm going coasting and plan on enjoying wherever this ride takes me for a few months.

Good info OP!

[Odin2005]

22. So what?

you can be socially conservative while supporting a progressive economic agenda. The Democratic Party is a big tent, it should be open to all people who are left-wing on economic issues.

[KharmaTrain]

23. What Does Choice Have To Do With Iraq?

Or the raising the minimum wage? Or fixing medicare? Or restoring our rights through dismantling the Patriot Act? Murtha knows how to move things in Congress...he'll be the muscle Pelosi needs to get the real tough issues done and fighting this regime and its corporate media toadies. I don't see Choice as being an issue in the forthcoming Congress and want the most effective team in place to get things done.

People are expecting Democrats to fight and bicker and gridlock. My real hope is there's something positive done and to give the leadership the benefit of the doubt and support in getting what they think are the people they need in the places they need to be effective.

[MADem]

26. First, he is not Majority Leader -- the reps must vote, the smart money is still on Hoyer, and 2nd,

he is NOT "as anti choice as they come." He favors embryonic stem cell research. If he were totally rabidly "anti-choice," he'd knock that off his list along with pregnancy termination. He does have religious convictions on the subject, and at his age, don't count on changing his mind.

He is well to the right of Hoyer.

It's unhelpful to characterize someone based on a single issue. Harry Reid is anti-choice as well. Let's see where Murtha sits, overall...hmmm, not quite a hyper-righty, is he?


John Murtha is a Moderate Populist.

http://www.ontheissues.org/PA/John_Murtha.htm


Steny Hoyer is a Populist-Leaning Liberal.

http://www.ontheissues.org/House/Steny_Hoyer.htm

[Leopolds Ghost]

40. Murtha is certainly Not "well to the right" of Hoyer.

1. They are both at 30% on economic issues -- the only metric that matters,
since the government has no place in the bedroom and never did,
back when this nation was much more conservative on social issues.

2. Hoyer is in reality at 50% on the pro-corporate "economic issues"
scale. He is the quintessential Maryland/Delaware Big Business Dem.

3. The Libertarian scale is skewed about 40 points to the right on
economic issues, placing people like Hoyer in the "liberal" column
when they are really in the "pro business, libertarian capitalist"
cxolumn like Hillary.

This puts "liberal populists", in reality, in the center.

[MADem]

44. You can't decide that economic issues are the only metric that matter though.

Because they aren't. Those social issues DO matter to people with a stake in them.

The choice issue is of import to half the country, at least.

The civil rights issues, like them or not, are important to minority persons who have suffered discrimination.

It's those sorts of votes that push Hoyer more to the left.

[thereismore]

28. I feel great about it. What worries me is the alleged ethics problems. nt

[jobycom]

31. It bothers me a lot that we might turn over part of the leadership of the party

to someone that fundamentally in disagreement with our basic principles.

On the other hand, if he's the choice, then I'm not going to start this new period of Democratic ascendancy by ripping the party apart. I'll respectfully oppose him until he is chosen on Thursday. Then I'll join ranks behind whomever I have to, and fight the issue only if it comes up again.

I think we are so used to fighting everything that it will take a while for us to learn how to work together. Reminds me of Benjamin Frankin's words at the Constitutional Convention: On the whole, sir, I can not help expressing a wish that every member of the convention who may still have objections to it, would, with me, on this occasion, doubt a little of his own infallibility, and, to make manifest our unanimity, put his name to this instrument.

[madmusic]

32. Abortion will be outlawed eventually.

All the pieces of the puzzle are on the table and both the Left and the Right hold them fast. All that is needed is the right time to assemble the puzzle. The legality of abortion hinges on when a fetus becomes a human life. Once there is a SCOTUS ruling that the fetus is human from the time of conception, or some time later, abortion will be illegal except for rape, incest or when the mother's life is in danger. I've slowly been swayed to agreeing with that, especially since hearing about the recent oral arguments on partial birth abortion. They talked about dismembering. That just seems so contrary to...

1. The Victim's Bill of Rights.
2. Human rights.
3. Sexual responsibility and facing the consequences.
5. Most illegal sexual acts aren't deadly.

All of these gained ground and are now rock solid in politics - on the Left and the Right - and in the legal community. So once a fetus is defined as person, he or she will have these rights and protections. And that, I think, could very well be progress, provided abortion is still allowed in cases of an emergency. Not sure yet, though.

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/05-1382.pdf">Dismembering is a powerful picture though, and it is hard to imagine how it could be done to a piece of private property and not to a person. It is every bit as revolting as http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2720135&mesg_id=2720135">burning kittens.

Shivers, even.

[REP]

35. Your Argument Is Badly, Sadly Flawed

If, indeed, "the fetus is human (sic, since I presume you mean "a human being," as my both my forearm and my feces are human, but not human beings) from the time of conception" why would there be an exception for rape or incest? If it is the personhood of the fetus that is paramount, why does it matter how it was conceived? And as for posing a threat to the life of the WOMAN (not mother, unless she has previously given birth) - well, every single pregnancy poses a threat to life and health of woman in which it is occurring. How much risk is okeydokey by madmusic, MD? And where did you do your OB/GYN residency, by the way?

I'm just addressing these two sad silly flaws in your bad little argument for the moment. Let's see if they get answered, or if the usual happens.

[madmusic]

39. Well, if you always get so snarky (a euphemism),

it's no wonder the usual happens. And it's obvious what that is.

It's is also obvious why there would be an exception with rape or incest. If a person is pointing a gun at you and forces you to do something illegal, you are not guilty as you would be if you didn't it under your own volition. The same with rape or incest.

How much risk is okeydokey is between her and her doctor, Ms B.

The post was a potential direction the country is going. If you don't like it, or think it's wrong, oh, well. Maybe you'd be right, maybe not. It doesn't really matter that much to me, and sure doesn't matter enough to deal with snarky when trying to have a conversation.

Now I'm going to do what usually happens and put you on ignore.

EDIT: typo

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

58. Yet another DU'er throwing a generation of women under the bus..

If the SCOTUS rules that a "fetus" is human at conception, watch what happens to "contra" ception. That is the fundies' true objective. Once this medical decision by a woman is co-opted, it opens the door for all issues of conception, or not, to be regulated by the government.

Wacky fundie pharmacists are already trying to reduce access to contraception and morning after pills.

The fundies' basic fear...women enjoying sex without having to worry about pregnancy. We can't have that, can we?

I also disagree that criminalizing a woman and her doctor is a "rock solid" belief on the left. The Democratic party platform unequivocally supports choice.

I only hope that the young women of today realize how quickly and easily the control of their own bodies can be taken from them. And fight like hell to keep that from happening. MKJ

edited to add the Democratic Party Platform re: choice

Pursue embryonic stem cell research
Pres. Bush has rejected the calls from Nancy Reagan, Christopher Reeve & Americans across the land for assistance with embryonic stem cell research. We will reverse his wrongheaded policy. Stem cell therapy offers hope to more than 100 million Americans who have serious illnesses-from Alzheimer's to heart disease to juvenile diabetes to Parkinson's. We will pursue this research under the strictest ethical guidelines, but we will not walk away from the chance to save lives and reduce human suffering.
Source: The Democratic Platform for America, p.29 Jul 10, 2004

Support right to choose even if mother cannot pay
Because we believe in the privacy and equality of women, we stand proudly for a woman's right to choose, consistent with Roe v. Wade, and regardless of her ability to pay. We stand firmly against Republican efforts to undermine that right. At the same time, we strongly support family planning and adoption incentives. Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.
Source: The Democratic Platform for America, p.36 Jul 10, 2004

Choice is a fundamental, constitutional right
Democrats stand behind the right of every woman to choose. We believe it is a constitutional liberty. This year’s Supreme Court ruling show us that eliminating a woman’s right to choose is only one justice away. Our goal is to make abortion more rare, not more dangerous. We support contraceptive research, family planning, comprehensive family life education, and policies that support healthy childbearing.
Source: Democratic National Platform Aug 15, 2000

[madmusic]

62. I didn't say that...

But only meant that the foundations for criminalizing it are rock solid, because if and when a fetus is ruled a person rather than private property, they are already in place. So I'm not throwing anyone under the bus but am merely observing a possible trend that could emerge from the dialectical forces involved. Because we do not as yet have a synthesis for these contradictory forces (evidenced by the continuing debates) we can expect one. The only question is what that synthesis will be. So I'm only suggesting that because law enforcement is the traditional solution (synthesis)in child care concerns, it follows it would be the solution here as well.

To see the inherent dialectical conflict, let's ask two questions.

1. Do you think child abusers should get jail time and do you think women should have the right to choose?

The majority of Democrats might fairly easily answer "Yes" to this question. However, it fails the reveal the dialectical conflict the Right proposes:

2. Do you think child abusers should get jail time and do you think expectant mothers should have to right to dismember their fetuses?

This is the question, correctly framed or not, that the Right asks. Instantly the dialectical conflict is visible. It is much more difficult if not impossible to answer a straight forward "Yes" to this question. Even many Democrats might have trouble with it because it is so contradictory if not hypocritical. Prison for child abusers is rock solid. However, when framed as child abuse, abortion is sharply contradictory to that rock solid standard. So we have a thesis and anti-thesis, and no synthesis. That is why the debate rages on.

I'm not sure how pro-choice advocates can resolve this conflict into a pro-choice synthesis, and as long as the courts rule in favor of choice they may not need to, but to win the abortion debate once and for all, they must resolve it. Otherwise, given the trend in favor of law enforcement solutions, the synthesis will likely evolve into one of abortion criminalization.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

65. Your framing of abortion as child abuse is the perfect RW talking point.

We'll see if your desired vision of criminalizing women seeking abortions comes true. Law enforcement also applies to medical privacy, i.e. HIPAA via the OCR.

MKJ

[madmusic]

66. It's not my frame.

That frame has been hanging on the wall for years. Not my vision, either. I'm about as anti-police state as they come (which does not necessarily mean anti-police). The Right has been fighting for years, and it is their vision and their argument. That's why they sometimes use pictures.

As to the HIPAA, Google "regulation" and "compelling state interest" and you will find that regulations are not subject to the same constitutional protections (or maybe you already know, and if so, you already know what I'm saying). You will also find the one by one the constitutional dominoes are falling under the umbrella of regulations. Many have fallen since Roe v. Wade. The country as a whole is far more pro-regulation, pro-prosecution, pro-agency and pro-executive branch. In the process, individual rights have one by one fallen by the wayside. Not enough to incite radical public outcry (other than from those who already researched it), and not sudden enough to draw too much attention. No, one little domino at a time. BushCo went too fast and revealed too much and that probably set them back a year or two. The groundwork wasn't that rock solid yet. But that machine is still rolling.

[Spider Jerusalem]

33. And Pelosi is very much PRO-choice.

With 100% ratings from pro-choice groups. And she wants Murtha as majority leader, so it obviously doesn't bother her.

Nor does it really bother me; Murtha's district consists of mostly small towns in western Pennsylvania coal country whose populations are largely Catholic and tend to be socially conservative; as a Congressman, he represents their interests. But as Majority Leader, he'd be representing the interests of the party and working for the agenda set by the Speaker (who, again, is very much pro-choice, as are the majority of Democrats in Congress).

[YellingTuna]

34. I dont think pro-life or pro-choice should be the #1 priority.

I rather doubt that policy will change on those issues any time soon. Especially with democrats as the majority. The issue at hand should really be the unnecessary death in Iraq, and of course the patriot act. As for guns, I SUPPORT gun safety however like the 1st amendment, the 2nd amendment should be honored as well. You cant fight a battle for your rights, then go against others.
P.S. (I personally beleive in some abortion restrictions)

[REP]

36. Spoken Like a True Uterus-Free Patriot

Me - I like the Constitution the way it is and I don't like politicians making medical decisions. You obviously feel differently, which is ... amusing.

[Leopolds Ghost]

41. Do you think the right to choice is the most important right?

More important than the right not to starve or be kicked off welfare or out of your house? ("In today's economy? don't be ridiculous," many social-issues Dems are probably thinking. "We're better off now with welfare reform") More important than the right not to be killed or detained by US troops?

[dailykoff]

42. Bingo. The issue is genocide.

WE are committing it and Murtha plans to STOP it.

There are pro-war "Democrats" who will trump up any distraction to prevent this issue from being addressed, but if last Tuesday is any indication they're losing ground fast.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

59. Excuse me? Are you suggesting abortion is genocide?

Please clarify. MKJ

[Perky]

43. Hoyer is going to win anyway does not matter. n/t

[dailykoff]

45. With GE behind him how could he lose?

Then again, all their guys lost last week.

[Terri S]

47. the Democratic party is not a lock-stepping uni-mind

It is a huge tent with varied positions on many things. That's a good thing imho. I don't think the ethics thing has legs, but if there's corruption anywhere then bring it out! Scum in any party should be loudly denounced by everyone.

[Freddie Stubbs]

49. Technically, he would not be 'our' Majority Leader'

He would be the Majority Leader for the Democrats in the House.

[Harper_is_Bush]

50. You cannot affort to be a one issue person in this world.

Unless that issue is Global Warming, imo.

[semillama]

60. well said

it's foolish to ignore the boot of the giant that's about to stomp down on our heads, because we'd rather be more concerned about being stinged by the wasps buzzing around.

[MoonRiver]

51. I really don't know why this choice of leader is such a big deal.

We have the House. THAT'S the big deal.

[bigtree]

53. Murtha will be an excellent point man on Iraq.

That alone is why he was chosen, and why I support him.

[MoonRiver]

54. I have no doubt Murtha would be excellent in the position.

But Dems are going to hold *'s feet to the fire on Iraq anyway. IF Hoyer is leader, he won't counter the Dems's Iraqi stance. At least I wouldn't think so.

Anyway, I am still so jubilent over our wins, that I just can't get very excited about this. I'm also seriously trying to let the Joe Lieberman issue go. The words "sometimes a circle feels like a direction" represent to me how we on DU tend to go on and on about something that is beyond our control and/or not worth the energy expended on it.

edited for grammar

[bigtree]

57. I think you underestimate what he'll be tasked to do in that debate

I won't try to outline it. We'll see.

[bigtree]

52. I wonder where that will be relevant in the House term?

Is there some abortion legislation you can imagine he'd influence in his role as majority leader? Any specific bill in mind?

And, would he really be able to influence the decidedly pro-choice Democratic majority?

[bleedingheart]

55. I never liked Murtha...and he loved the war until he saw it was a

disaster...I also have heard rumors locally that his "anti-war" strategy is more of a political maneuver than reality.

[blondeatlast]

56. We control the committees now. Pelosi controls the chairs of those committees.

I'm neither pro- or anti-Murtha (I'm neither "pro-" or "anti-life," either, fwiw) but we need to get a grip about how the legislative body works.

No self-respecting or political-career-valuing Dem is going to draft legislation to end abortion. That would be suicide for them. Any bills that the GOP drafts can be halted in committee and I don't care if the Dems say that they blocked a certain bill for political reasons--seriously. Politics ISN'T a dirty word.

I respect Nancy Pelosi and think she is going to be one of the best things to happen to the political process in over a decade. She remembers who her boss is--US.

She'll keep her mid-level managers in line. Believe it.

[Tatiana]

63. Well, that's not the problem I have with him.

I'm more concerned with his ethics. I don't think his position on choice should disqualify him from a leadership position. He's a conservative Dem.

[David Zephyr]

64. Murtha won't win. He never had the votes.

However, attacking him with 25 year old shit was unseemly.

Murtha never had the votes. Hoyer had them from the beginning.

I believe that Pelosi knew that, but gave him a shot.

Hoyer will be the Majority Leader.

And Murtha was swiftboated.

[slackmaster]

67. We celebrate diversity

At least a LITTLE diversity.

[Geek_Girl]

68. Some how I'm just not scared of Murtha taking away my reproductive rights

The GOP has been in power for a very long time and hasn't seem to have very much luck with their pro-life agenda. Maybe I'm naive but I just don't think the Majority Leader is going to have much luck either.