How Did Your Representative Vote on HR 3?

HR 3, also called the 'No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,' passed the House on May 4th.  This bill redefines rape so that only acts of 'forcible rape' would be included in any rape exception for abortion coverage (the original clause was removed, but a "back door" was left open in committee), removes the tax credit of employers who offer health benefits that include abortion provisions, and would require anyone using Health Savings accounts to pay for abortions to pay taxes on those funds. This bill now goes to the Senate, where it will likely not pass.

Here is a summary from Open Congress:

This bill would make permanent and expand the Hyde amendment restrictions on the use of federal funds for abortions. It seeks to prohibit even indirect funding streams that may potentially come in contact with abortion services. For example, it would deny tax credits to companies that offer health plans that cover abortions and it would block anybody with insurance that covers abortions from receiving federal subsidies or medical cost tax deductions, even if the abortion portion is paid separately with personal funds. Women who use tax-free Medical Savings Accounts would have to pay taxes on the costs of abortions.

How did your Representative vote?  Check here.

H.R. 3, Wide-Sweeping Anti-Abortion Bill, Facing House Vote

H.R. 3, the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortions Act," is scheduled for a vote today in the House of Representatives.  This is bill, sponsored by Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) and Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), gained notoriety for including language that would redefine rape.  According to reporting from Mother Jones, while the specific rape language has been removed, the bill's sponsors have taken steps in committee to ensure the redefinition of rape will stand if challenged in court to apply to only "forcible rape."

A closer look at a House bill marketed to the public as a "common-sense" ban on taxpayer-funded abortions reveals an aggressive, multi-pronged effort to restrict insurance coverage for and reduce access to abortion.

H.R. 3, also known as the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortions Act," would go beyond making the Hyde Amendment, which has already banned federally-funded abortions for the past 30 years, a permanent federal law. The legislation, sponsored by Reps. Chris Smith (R-N.J.) and House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), would also enact strict procedural requirements for private insurance companies that cover abortions and deny tax credits to small businesses that purchase health insurance plans offering abortion coverage. Eight[y]-seven percent of private insurance plans currently include such coverage.

Read more at Huffington Post

GOP Bill Would Force IRS to Conduct Abortion Audits

HR 3 would not only extend the reach of the Hyde Amendment, it would have IRS agents asking women who have abortions if they were raped or victims of incest during an tax audit.  (Yes, it's the same HR3 that tried to redefine rape.)

Under a GOP-backed bill expected to sail through the House of Representatives, the Internal Revenue Service would be forced to police how Americans have paid for their abortions. To ensure that taxpayers complied with the law, IRS agents would have to investigate whether certain terminated pregnancies were the result of rape or incest. And one tax expert says that the measure could even lead to questions on tax forms: Have you had an abortion? Did you keep your receipt?

In testimony to a House taxation subcommittee on Wednesday, Thomas Barthold, the chief of staff of the nonpartisan Joint Tax Committee, confirmed that one consequence of the Republicans' "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act" would be to turn IRS agents into abortion cops—that is, during an audit, they'd have to detemine, from evidence provided by the taxpayer, whether any tax benefit had been inappropriately used to pay for an abortion.

Read more at Mother Jones

REPORT: The Five Ways That The GOP Is Trying To Eradicate A Woman’s Right To Choose

This article highlights the 5 main attacks on reproductive rights and women that are currently being carried out by state and federal lawmakers - everything from fetal "heartbeat bills" that would prevent abortion once a heartbeat can be heard (usually by 6 weeks) to mandating a woman have and view an ultrasound to potentially making the slaying of an abortion provider "justifiable homicide."

South Dakota is one of the most anti-abortion states in the country. In 1994, the state banned abortion providers inside its borders. “Planned Parenthood flies a doctor in from out-of-state once a week to see patients at a Sioux Falls clinic. Women from the more remote parts of the large, rural state drive up to six hours to reach this lone clinic” and must “receive counseling and wait 24 hours before undergoing the procedure.”

Now, it seems South Dakota is willing to legalize acts of terror in order to be the number one anti-abortion state in the U.S. The South Dakota House is taking up a bill to redefine “justifiable homicide” that may “make it legal to kill doctors who perform abortions,” Mother Jones reports. Passed out of committee on a 9-3 party line vote, the GOP-backed bill “could in theory allow a woman’s father, mother, son, daughter, or husband to kill anyone who tried to provide that woman an abortion — even if she wanted one.”

Read more at Think Progress

Nancy Pelosi: Women's Rights Face Greatest Threat 'In Our Lifetime'

Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi states that the current attack on reproductive rights is the worst "in our lifetime" and calls on Americans to get involved to defeat these attacks.  One bill could come up for a vote as early as next week.

Women's reproductive rights are being seriously threatened by the Republican Party, according to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who said she is worried that many women are complacent about the possibility that they will lose access to abortions.

"They're advancing extreme legislation," Pelosi said Thursday during a conference call with reporters. "It's dangerous to women's health, disrespects the judgment of American women -- I don't know if they even gave that a thought -- and it's the most comprehensive and radical assault on women's health in our lifetime. It's that bad."

 Read more at Huffington Post

Democrats Preparing To Fight Anti-Abortion GOPers With Economic Message

With hearings set to start today on 2 anti-reproductive rights bills, Pro-choice Democrats are gearing up for a fight.  HR 3, sponsored by Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) and initially included a provision to redefine rape, is scheduled for a Judiciary subcommittee hearing.  HR 358, sponsored by Rep. Joe Pitts (R-PA) would allow hospitals to allow a woman to die rather that perform an abortion will be brought before the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

Pro-choice Democrats are raring for an abortion fight this week -- and they intend to start one. After a trio of ultra-conservative abortion bills were filed in the weeks since the Republicans took over earlier this year, returning House Democrats and several of their Senate colleagues will roll out a multi-tiered attack on the GOP's abortion plans, simultaneously painting the bills as extreme, hypocritical and off the all-important economic message.

Read more at Talking Points Memo

Radio Silence On Rape-Redefining Abortion Bill From The Right

Elected officials and even anti-choice groups seem reluctant to discuss H.R. 3, the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act," especially the section that would potentially redefine rape.

The Republican-controlled House is considering new limitations on federal funding for abortion that could be a crown jewel of the GOP leadership's attempt to show its constituents there's a new, socially conservative sheriff in town -- if anyone was willing to discuss it, that is.

It seems one of the only people willing to talk at all about the controversial abortion bill is one of its Democratic co-sponsors, Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-IL). And he's not willing to embrace the language in the bill that appears to redefine rape in a way that would prevent some impregnated victims from having their abortions covered by insurance.

Read more at TPM