July 31, 2012 — The House leadership's decision to vote on a bill (HR 3803) that would ban abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy in the District of Columbia shows "it thinks infringing on the authority of a local government to limit women's constitutional rights is no big deal," a Washington Post editorial states.
The House is scheduled to vote on the bill on Tuesday under a procedure called suspension of the rules "that is normally used for non-controversial things like naming post offices or honoring folks back home," the editorial notes. The use of the procedure suggests that supporters are "more interested in putting on a show to placate special interests than actually passing the measure," according to the editorial, which adds, "What gets lost in the gamesmanship are the lives that could be impacted."
The legislation is "a misuse of Congress's time and another cynical exploitation of the District to advance others' political agendas," according to the editorial. There is "little chance" that the Senate or President Obama would approve the measure, the editorial states, "[b]ut that won't stop the issue from being demagogued or used as a rallying point or an appeal for money in the upcoming presidential and other national elections" (Washington Post, 7/30).
Debra Ness, publisher & president, National Partnership
Andrea Friedman, associate editor & director of reproductive health programs, National Partnership
Marya Torrez, associate editor & senior reproductive health policy counsel, National Partnership
Melissa Safford, associate editor & policy advocate for reproductive health, National Partnership
Perry Sacks, assistant editor & health program associate, National Partnership
Cindy Romero, assistant editor & communications assistant, National Partnership
Justyn Ware, editor
Amanda Wolfe, editor-in-chief
Heather Drost, Hanna Jaquith, Marcelle Maginnis, Ashley Marchand and Michelle Stuckey, staff writers
Tucker Ball, director of new media, National Partnership