Jump to content

Freedom of Choice Act: Difference between revisions

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→Oppose: removed references to John McCain since it had nothing to do with the Subject of this article
Rescuing 0 sources and tagging 1 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.5
 
(337 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|American legislative pro-choice proposal}}
The '''''Freedom of Choice Act''''' ({{USBill|110|HR|1964}}/{{USBill|110|S|1173}}) is a [[Bill (proposed law)|bill]] in the [[United States Congress]] which, if enacted, would abolish all restrictions and limitations on the right of women in the United States to have an [[abortion]] prior to fetal viability, whether at the [[State]] or [[Federal]] level.
In United States politics, the '''Freedom of Choice Act''' was a [[Bill (proposed law)|bill]] which sought to codify into law for women a "fundamental right to choose to bear a child; terminate a pregnancy prior to [[Fetus#Viability|fetal viability]]; or terminate a pregnancy after viability when necessary to protect her life or her health". It sought to prohibit a federal, state, or local governmental entity from denying or interfering with a woman's right to exercise such choices; or discriminating against the exercise of those rights in the regulation or provision of benefits, facilities, services, or information. Provides that such prohibition shall apply retroactively. It also authorizes an individual aggrieved by a violation of this Act to obtain appropriate relief, including relief against a governmental entity, in a civil action".<ref>Congressional Research Services (CRS) Summary of H.R. 1964.</ref>


The bill was introduced to the [[United States Congress|Congress]] in 1989, 1993,<ref name=popline/> 2004<ref name=pennlive/> and 2007 (H.R. 1964/S. 1173).
==Sponsorship==
⚫
The Freedom of Choice Act was sponsored in the House of Representatives by Congressman [[Jerrold Nadler]], and originally co-sponsored by Congressman [[James C. Greenwood|James Greenwood]], Congresswoman [[Louise Slaughter]], and Congresswoman [[Diana Degette]]. In the Senate, it was sponsored by Senator [[Barbara Boxer]], and originally co-sponsored by Senators [[Jon Corzine]], [[Patty Murray]], [[Frank Lautenberg]], [[Hillary Rodham Clinton]], [[Maria Cantwell]], [[Jim Jeffords]], [[Joseph Lieberman]], [[Diane Feinstein]], [[Paul Sarbanes]], and [[Barbara Mikulski]]. The bill was introduced in the [[United States House of Representatives]] on January 21, 2004, and in the [[United States Senate]] on January 22, 2004. [[Barack Obama]] promises to sign it if it is passed by Congress.


== Findings sections ==
==Status==
The bill asserts in its findings section that Congress has the affirmative power to legislate [[abortion]] based, in part, on the crossing of state lines by abortion providers, women seeking abortions, and medical supplies used in abortions.<ref>American Center for Law and Justice. [http://www.aclj.org/media/pdf/Executive_Summary_Freedom_of_Choice_Act_05012007.pdf Executive Summary of the Freedom of Choice Act] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081128092124/http://www.aclj.org/media/pdf/Executive_Summary_Freedom_of_Choice_Act_05012007.pdf |date=2008-11-28 }} May 1, 2007</ref>
⚫
The bills were referred to the [[Judiciary Committee]]s of their respective Houses. Neither bill received further action in the 108th Congress. The bills were reintroduced in the 110th Congress, but like their predecessors, have been referred to committee without further action.


== Status and sponsorship ==
⚫
==Description==
The bill is described by [[NARAL Pro-Choice America]] president [[Nancy Keenan]] as a bill to "codify [[Roe v. Wade]]" which would "repeal the Bush-backed Federal Abortion Ban," referring to the [[Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act]], "and other federal restrictions," <ref>[http://chat.prochoiceamerica.org/content/interview/detail/543/ Choice Chat transcript] [[NARAL]] Pro Choice America</ref>. Similarly, opponents of the bill assert that<ref>[http://www.capwiz.com/nrlc/issues/bills/?bill=9668701&size=full Federal Legislation] [[National Right to Life Committee]]</ref> it would, if passed, invalidate every restriction on an abortion before the stage of viability, even those previously found consistent with Roe v. Wade by the [[United States Supreme Court]], such as parental notification laws, waiting periods, requirements of full disclosure of the physical and emotional risks inherent in abortion, and the [[Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act]]. Opponents further assert that it would challenge the right of religiously-based hospitals or clinics to refuse to perform abortions, and that it would force the repeal of the [[Hyde Amendment]], which restricts the use of Federal funding for abortions. Conservative legal scholar [[Douglas Kmiec]] disagrees with the latter assertion, noting that the Hyde Amendment is renewed annually by Congress and arguing that this legislation would not supersede it <ref>[http://blog.beliefnet.com/progressiverevival/2008/10/kmiec-responds-to-criticism-on.html Kmiec Responds to Criticism on Abortion Reduction "Scam"] Beliefnet</ref>.


The bill was first introduced to the [[United States Congress|Congress]] in 1989 and again in 1993.<ref name=popline>[http://www.popline.org/docs/0988/079750.html]{{Dead link|date=May 2019 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref> It was reintroduced in 2004 in the [[108th Congress]],<ref name=pennlive>[http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2009/03/catholics_wary_of_possible_bil.html "Catholics wary of possible bill on abortion"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181129054420/https://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2009/03/catholics_wary_of_possible_bil.html |date=November 29, 2018 }}.</ref> on January 21 in the [[United States House of Representatives|House of Representatives]] and on January 22 in the [[United States Senate|Senate]].{{cn|date=July 2022}}
==Views==


⚫
The 2004{{cn|date=July 2022}} version was sponsored in the House of Representatives by [[Jerrold Nadler]], and originally{{clarifyme|date=July 2022}} co-sponsored by [[James C. Greenwood|James Greenwood]], [[Louise Slaughter]], and [[Diana Degette]]. In the Senate, it was sponsored by [[Barbara Boxer]], and originally co-sponsored by Senators [[Jon Corzine]], [[Patty Murray]], [[Frank Lautenberg]], [[Hillary Clinton]], [[Maria Cantwell]], [[Jim Jeffords]], [[Joseph Lieberman]], [[Dianne Feinstein]], [[Paul Sarbanes]], and [[Barbara Mikulski]].
===Support===
⚫
Sen. [[Barack Obama]], D-Ill., the [[Democratic]] President-Elect, became a co-sponsor of the 2007 Senate version of the bill ({{USBill|110|S|1173}}). Responding to a question regarding how he would preserve reproductive rights in a speech given to the [[Planned Parenthood]] Action Fund on [[July 17]], [[2007]], he declared "The first thing I'd do, as president, is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That's the first thing that I'd do."<ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pf0XIRZSTt8 Barack Obama Promises to Sign FOCA] YouTube.com, posted [[July 9]], [[2008]].</ref>


⚫
The bills were referred to the Judiciary Committees of the respective Houses. Neither bill received further action in the [[108th Congress]]. The bills were reintroduced on April 19 2007 in the [[110th Congress]] (H.R. 1964/S. 1173), but, like their predecessors, were referred to committee without further action.
===Oppose===
The [[United States Conference of Catholic Bishops|U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB)]] has been vehemently opposed to the Freedom of Choice Act. According to the [[United States Conference of Catholic Bishops|USCCB]]'s Secretariat for [[Pro-life|Pro-Life]] Activites, FOCA would not only "codify the Supreme Court's 1973 decision in ''[[Roe v. Wade]]''" but "in allowing and promoting abortion, FOCA goes far beyond even ''Roe''."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.usccb.org/prolife/issues/FOCA/FOCA_FactSheet08.pdf|publisher=[[United States Conference of Catholic Bishops|USCCB]]|accessdate=2008-11-08|date=2008-9-30|title=The "Freedom of Choice Act:" Most Radical Abortion Legislation in U.S. History}}</ref> On November 12, 2008, Francis Cardinal George, president of the USCCB, warned that FOCA would limit the right of Catholic hospitals and doctors to not offer abortions adding that, "those who support FOCA must realize that if Catholic hospitals are ever required to perform abortions, the bishops will close every one of them; no one would be hurt more than the poor."<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.catholicleague.org/release.php?id=1515|author=Donahue, Bill|authorlink=William J. Donahue|title=Bishops Warn Obama on Abortion; Catholic Left Rebuked|publisher=[[Catholic League (U.S.)|Catholic League]]|date=2008-11-12|accessdate=2008-11-12}}</ref> Drawing on [[Pope Pius VI]]'s [[encyclical]] ''[[Humanae Vitae]]'', the [[Roman Catholic Church|Catholic]] [[Apologetics|apologist]] Frank M. Rega, [[Secular Franciscan Order|S.F.O.]], writes<ref>{{cite web|title=St. Padre Pio, Humanae Vitae, and Mandatory Abortion|author=Rega, Frank M., [[Secular Franciscan Order|S.F.O.]]|date=2008-10-11|accessdate=2008-11-17|url=http://www.sanpadrepio.com/piolife.htm|quote=What began as a "right" to abortion might become a "duty"}}</ref>:<blockquote>The Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) is legislation co-sponsored by Barack Obama which would nullify all state laws that in any way attempt to limit or regulate abortion, including [[Intact dilation and extraction|partial-birth abortion]]. Ironically, it specifies that government will not interfere with a woman’s choice to keep or to kill her unborn child. Nevertheless, FOCA would be a major move towards the dangerous precipice of government-mandated abortion, since it would consolidate all power over birth control into the hands of federal law and authorities. From there it would only be a small step to amend it in the light of overriding national health interests, environmental or population concerns, or any other reason deemed appropriate. Thus the FOCA clause in section 4.b.1.a, stating that a woman has the “right to choose to bear a child” could conveniently and easily be changed to, for example, that a woman has the right to choose to bear up to two children. More ominously, it could be amended to state that a woman has the right to bear a child, except in cases of rape, incest, Down syndrome, etc.</blockquote>


⚫
During his tenure in the [[United States Senate]], [[Barack Obama]] co-sponsored the 2007 Senate version of the Freedom of Choice Act (S. 1173). Responding to a question regarding how he would preserve reproductive rights in a speech given to the [[Planned Parenthood]] Action Fund on July 17, 2007, Obama declared, "The first thing I'd do, as president, is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That's the first thing that I'd do."<ref>[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pf0XIRZSTt8 Barack Obama Promises to Sign FOCA] YouTube.com, posted July 9, 2008.</ref>
The pro-life organization [[Americans United for Life|Americans United for Life (AUL)]] began a petition called [http://www.FightFOCA.com/ Fight FOCA] to collect signatures to oppose FOCA. AUL also wrote an open letter to Senator [[Barack Obama]] on FOCA.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.fightfoca.com/Dear_Sen_Obama.pdf|title=An Open Letter to Senator Obama on Behalf of All Ohio Parents|accessdate=2008-11-08|author= Yoest, Charmaine, Ph.D}}</ref> As of Monday, November 17, 2008 at 18:40:00 UT, the Fight FOCA petition has 171,782 signatures.<ref>[http://b3.caspio.com/dp.asp?AppKey=b3661000e9c6j0f0h2d1c3a2d2h8 Fight FOCA signatures counter]</ref>


In a press conference on April 29, 2009, President Obama said that although he supports a woman's right to choose to have an abortion, passage of the Freedom of Choice Act was not his "highest legislative priority".<ref>{{cite news |title=Obama on FOCA 2.0 |url= https://www.factcheck.org/2009/04/obama-on-foca-20/ |date=April 30, 2009}}</ref> Although Democrats controlled both the House and Senate during the [[111th Congress]], protecting abortion rights was not prioritized since six of the nine sitting [[Supreme Court of the United States|Supreme Court]] Justices supported upholding ''[[Roe v. Wade]]''. Instead, Democrats focused on passing the [[Affordable Care Act]]. It would not be until the [[113th Congress]] in 2013 that another abortion rights bill would be introduced, the [[Women's Health Protection Act]].<ref>{{cite web |title=Women’s Health Protection Act of 2013 (2013 - S. 1696) |url=https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/s1696 |website=GovTrack.us |access-date=17 May 2023 |language=en}}</ref><ref name="McCormack">{{cite news |last1=McCormack |first1=John |title=Why Didn’t Democrats Codify Roe When They Had the Chance? |url=https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/06/why-didnt-democrats-codify-roe-when-they-had-the-chance/ |access-date=17 May 2023 |work=National Review |date=30 June 2022}}</ref>
==Notes==
<references />


⚫
==Description and criticism ==
⚫
==External links==
The bill is described by [[NARAL Pro-Choice America]] president [[Nancy Keenan]] as a bill to "codify [[Roe v. Wade]]" which would "repeal the Bush-backed Federal Abortion Ban", referring to the [[Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act]], and "other federal restrictions".<ref>[http://chat.prochoiceamerica.org/content/interview/detail/543/ Choice Chat transcript] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081012035728/http://chat.prochoiceamerica.org/content/interview/detail/543/ |date=2008-10-12 }} [[NARAL]] Pro Choice America</ref> Opponents of FOCA assert that it would, if passed, invalidate every restriction on abortion nationwide, including parental notification laws, informed consent laws, and bans on partial birth abortion.<ref name="usccb.org">{{Cite web|url=http://www.usccb.org/about/pro-life-activities/index.cfm|title=Pro-Life Activities|website=www.usccb.org}}</ref> However, the bill would still prohibit partial birth abortions due to the wording of the bill and the stated definition of viability, the stage of pregnancy when there is a reasonable likelihood of the sustained survival of the fetus outside of the woman.<ref name="thomas.loc.gov">http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:S.1173{{Dead link|date=August 2021 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}:</ref>
*[http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.uscongress/legislation.108s2020 ''Freedom of Choice Act (Introduced in Senate)''] - Text of Senate bill S.2020 IS

*[http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.uscongress/legislation.108hr3719 ''Freedom of Choice Act (Introduced in House)''] - Text of House bill HR 3719 IH
[[File:No FOCA crop.jpg|222px|right|thumb|Two days after [[Barack Obama 2009 presidential inauguration|Barack Obama's inauguration]], a protester in the [[March for Life (Washington, D.C.)|March for Life]] holds a "No FOCA" sign.]]
The [[United States Conference of Catholic Bishops|U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB)]] has been strongly opposed to the Freedom of Choice Act. According to the [[United States Conference of Catholic Bishops|USCCB's]] Secretariat for [[Pro-life|Pro-Life]] Activities, FOCA would not only "codify the Supreme Court's 1973 decision in ''[[Roe v. Wade]]''" but "in allowing and promoting abortion, FOCA goes far beyond even ''Roe''".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.usccb.org/prolife/issues/FOCA/FOCA_FactSheet08.pdf|publisher=[[United States Conference of Catholic Bishops|USCCB]]|accessdate=2008-11-08|date=2008-09-30|title=The "Freedom of Choice Act:" Most Radical Abortion Legislation in U.S. History}}</ref>

Opponents of FOCA assert that the bill would force taxpayers to subsidize abortion and would jeopardize existing laws prohibiting abortions in public hospitals and barring non-physicians from performing abortions.<ref name="usccb.org"/> Others{{who|date=October 2021}} estimate that the passage of FOCA would result in approximately 125,000 more abortions being performed annually in the United States.<ref>Kumpel, Robert. [http://www.nrlc.org/FOCA/LawmakersProposeFOCA.html "Why Pro-Lifers Fear FOCA"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090217100704/http://nrlc.org/foca/LawmakersProposeFOCA.html |date=2009-02-17 }} ''The National Catholic Register''</ref><ref>Bowman, Matt. [http://spectator.org/archives/2008/10/02/obamas-gift-to-america "Obama's Gift to America"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090406035220/http://spectator.org/archives/2008/10/02/obamas-gift-to-america |date=2009-04-06 }} ''The American Spectator''. October 2, 2008.</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/guest/2008/dwh_11241.shtml |title=Cardinal George Warns Catholic Members of Congress About FOCA -- Opinion Central -- GOPUSA |access-date=2009-02-11 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081228115255/http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/guest/2008/dwh_11241.shtml |archive-date=2008-12-28 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Some opponents argue that FOCA would effectively repeal the [[Hyde Amendment]], a federal law which bars the use of federal funding for abortions in some cases.{{Citation needed|date=February 2009}} Legal scholar [[Douglas Kmiec]], a pro-life Republican, disagrees with the latter assertion, noting that the Hyde Amendment is renewed annually by Congress; Kmiec argues that this legislation would not supersede it.<ref>[http://blog.beliefnet.com/progressiverevival/2008/10/kmiec-responds-to-criticism-on.html Kmiec Responds to Criticism on Abortion Reduction "Scam"] Beliefnet</ref>

Those who oppose the Act interpret it as an attempt to obligate religious hospitals to either "do abortions or close",<ref>[http://www.slate.com/id/2205326 "Obama's Threat to Catholic Hospitals"] Melinda Henneberger writing in ''Slate''</ref> while FOCA supporters argue that existing conscience clause laws would protect religious hospitals.<ref>[https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/300a-7 "Sterilization or Abortion"] US Code § 300a–7.</ref><ref>[http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2008/11/25/what-would-foca-really-do "What Would FOCA Really Do?"] Emily Douglas writing at RH Reality Check</ref> In early 2009, Catholic News Service asserted that in its interpretation of the legislation, FOCA neither poses any such risk to Catholic hospitals, nor would require religious hospitals to participate in abortion.<ref>[http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0900402.htm "Rumors aside, FOCA legislation no threat to Catholic health care"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090403232148/http://catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0900402.htm |date=2009-04-03 }} Nancy Frazier O'Brien, Catholic News Service, January 27, 2009</ref> Opponents, however, assert that conscience clauses are weak and easily reinterpreted, and do not explicitly allow religious hospitals to ban the abortion procedure within the hospital.<ref>[http://www.slate.com/id/2205326/pagenum/2 "Obama's Threat to Catholic Hospitals"] Page 2</ref>

The election of [[Barack Obama]], an advocate of the Freedom of Choice Act, to the presidency caused pro-life organizations to organize against the bill in early 2009. Notable campaigns that were organized include [[Americans United for Life]]'s petition to Congress called Fight FOCA<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.fightfoca.com/Dear_Sen_Obama.pdf|title=An Open Letter to Senator Obama on Behalf of All Ohio Parents|accessdate=2008-11-08|author= Yoest, Charmaine, Ph.D}}</ref> and the "What the FOCA?!" campaign created by [[Students for Life of Illinois]].<ref>{{cite web|title=Catholic Vote|url=https://www.catholicvote.org/what-the-foca/|access-date=2014-06-22|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150225032504/https://www.catholicvote.org/what-the-foca/|archive-date=2015-02-25|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.jillstanek.com/political-antilife-bias/what-the-foca.html|title=Jill Stanek}}{{Dead link|date=May 2024 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.ifrl.org/ifrl/news/090129_0.htm|title=Illinois Federation for Right to Life - Students: 'What the FOCA?!'|website=www.ifrl.org}}</ref> Although he promised Planned Parenthood in 2007 that “the first thing I’d do as president” would be to sign it, by May 2009 he said the bill is “not my highest legislative priority”.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Stolberg |first=Sheryl |date=2009-05-14 |title=On Abortion, Obama Is Drawn Into Debate He Had Hoped to Avoid |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/politics/15abortion.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220505174530/https://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/politics/15abortion.html |archive-date=2022-05-05 |access-date=2022-05-06 |website=[[The New York Times]]}}</ref>

== References ==
{{reflist}}

⚫
== External links ==
* [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:S2020: ''Freedom of Choice Act (Introduced in Senate)''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160125172018/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:S2020: |date=2016-01-25 }} - Text of Senate bill S 2020 IS (2004)
* [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:H.R.3719: ''Freedom of Choice Act (Introduced in House)''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160125172018/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:H.R.3719: |date=2016-01-25 }} - Text of House bill HR 3719 IH (2004)
* [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:S1173: ''Freedom of Choice Act (Introduced in Senate)''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110628104955/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:S1173: |date=2011-06-28 }} - Text of Senate bill S 1173 IS (2007)
* [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:H.R.1964: ''Freedom of Choice Act (Introduced in House)''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160125172018/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:H.R.1964: |date=2016-01-25 }} - Text of House bill HR 1964 IH (2007)

[[Category:Proposed legislation of the 108th United States Congress]]
[[Category:Proposed legislation of the 110th United States Congress]]
[[Category:United States proposed federal abortion legislation]]
[[Category:United States federal legislation articles without infoboxes]]

Latest revision as of 15:58, 11 May 2024

In United States politics, the Freedom of Choice Act was a bill which sought to codify into law for women a "fundamental right to choose to bear a child; terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability; or terminate a pregnancy after viability when necessary to protect her life or her health". It sought to prohibit a federal, state, or local governmental entity from denying or interfering with a woman's right to exercise such choices; or discriminating against the exercise of those rights in the regulation or provision of benefits, facilities, services, or information. Provides that such prohibition shall apply retroactively. It also authorizes an individual aggrieved by a violation of this Act to obtain appropriate relief, including relief against a governmental entity, in a civil action".[1]

The bill was introduced to the Congress in 1989, 1993,[2] 2004[3] and 2007 (H.R. 1964/S. 1173).

Findings sections

[edit]

The bill asserts in its findings section that Congress has the affirmative power to legislate abortion based, in part, on the crossing of state lines by abortion providers, women seeking abortions, and medical supplies used in abortions.[4]

Status and sponsorship

[edit]

The bill was first introduced to the Congress in 1989 and again in 1993.[2] It was reintroduced in 2004 in the 108th Congress,[3] on January 21 in the House of Representatives and on January 22 in the Senate.[citation needed]

The 2004[citation needed] version was sponsored in the House of Representatives by Jerrold Nadler, and originally[clarification needed] co-sponsored by James Greenwood, Louise Slaughter, and Diana Degette. In the Senate, it was sponsored by Barbara Boxer, and originally co-sponsored by Senators Jon Corzine, Patty Murray, Frank Lautenberg, Hillary Clinton, Maria Cantwell, Jim Jeffords, Joseph Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Paul Sarbanes, and Barbara Mikulski.

The bills were referred to the Judiciary Committees of the respective Houses. Neither bill received further action in the 108th Congress. The bills were reintroduced on April 19 2007 in the 110th Congress (H.R. 1964/S. 1173), but, like their predecessors, were referred to committee without further action.

During his tenure in the United States Senate, Barack Obama co-sponsored the 2007 Senate version of the Freedom of Choice Act (S. 1173). Responding to a question regarding how he would preserve reproductive rights in a speech given to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund on July 17, 2007, Obama declared, "The first thing I'd do, as president, is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That's the first thing that I'd do."[5]

In a press conference on April 29, 2009, President Obama said that although he supports a woman's right to choose to have an abortion, passage of the Freedom of Choice Act was not his "highest legislative priority".[6] Although Democrats controlled both the House and Senate during the 111th Congress, protecting abortion rights was not prioritized since six of the nine sitting Supreme Court Justices supported upholding Roe v. Wade. Instead, Democrats focused on passing the Affordable Care Act. It would not be until the 113th Congress in 2013 that another abortion rights bill would be introduced, the Women's Health Protection Act.[7][8]

Description and criticism

[edit]

The bill is described by NARAL Pro-Choice America president Nancy Keenan as a bill to "codify Roe v. Wade" which would "repeal the Bush-backed Federal Abortion Ban", referring to the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, and "other federal restrictions".[9] Opponents of FOCA assert that it would, if passed, invalidate every restriction on abortion nationwide, including parental notification laws, informed consent laws, and bans on partial birth abortion.[10] However, the bill would still prohibit partial birth abortions due to the wording of the bill and the stated definition of viability, the stage of pregnancy when there is a reasonable likelihood of the sustained survival of the fetus outside of the woman.[11]

Two days after Barack Obama's inauguration, a protester in the March for Life holds a "No FOCA" sign.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has been strongly opposed to the Freedom of Choice Act. According to the USCCB's Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities, FOCA would not only "codify the Supreme Court's 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade" but "in allowing and promoting abortion, FOCA goes far beyond even Roe".[12]

Opponents of FOCA assert that the bill would force taxpayers to subsidize abortion and would jeopardize existing laws prohibiting abortions in public hospitals and barring non-physicians from performing abortions.[10] Others[who?] estimate that the passage of FOCA would result in approximately 125,000 more abortions being performed annually in the United States.[13][14][15] Some opponents argue that FOCA would effectively repeal the Hyde Amendment, a federal law which bars the use of federal funding for abortions in some cases.[citation needed] Legal scholar Douglas Kmiec, a pro-life Republican, disagrees with the latter assertion, noting that the Hyde Amendment is renewed annually by Congress; Kmiec argues that this legislation would not supersede it.[16]

Those who oppose the Act interpret it as an attempt to obligate religious hospitals to either "do abortions or close",[17] while FOCA supporters argue that existing conscience clause laws would protect religious hospitals.[18][19] In early 2009, Catholic News Service asserted that in its interpretation of the legislation, FOCA neither poses any such risk to Catholic hospitals, nor would require religious hospitals to participate in abortion.[20] Opponents, however, assert that conscience clauses are weak and easily reinterpreted, and do not explicitly allow religious hospitals to ban the abortion procedure within the hospital.[21]

The election of Barack Obama, an advocate of the Freedom of Choice Act, to the presidency caused pro-life organizations to organize against the bill in early 2009. Notable campaigns that were organized include Americans United for Life's petition to Congress called Fight FOCA[22] and the "What the FOCA?!" campaign created by Students for Life of Illinois.[23][24][25] Although he promised Planned Parenthood in 2007 that “the first thing I’d do as president” would be to sign it, by May 2009 he said the bill is “not my highest legislative priority”.[26]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ Congressional Research Services (CRS) Summary of H.R. 1964.
  2. ^ a b [1][permanent dead link‍]
  3. ^ a b "Catholics wary of possible bill on abortion" Archived November 29, 2018, at the Wayback Machine.
  4. ^ American Center for Law and Justice. Executive Summary of the Freedom of Choice Act Archived 2008-11-28 at the Wayback Machine May 1, 2007
  5. ^ Barack Obama Promises to Sign FOCA YouTube.com, posted July 9, 2008.
  6. ^ "Obama on FOCA 2.0". April 30, 2009.
  7. ^ "Women's Health Protection Act of 2013 (2013 - S. 1696)". GovTrack.us. Retrieved 17 May 2023.
  8. ^ McCormack, John (30 June 2022). "Why Didn't Democrats Codify Roe When They Had the Chance?". National Review. Retrieved 17 May 2023.
  9. ^ Choice Chat transcript Archived 2008-10-12 at the Wayback Machine NARAL Pro Choice America
  10. ^ a b "Pro-Life Activities". www.usccb.org.
  11. ^ http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:S.1173[permanent dead link‍]:
  12. ^ "The "Freedom of Choice Act:" Most Radical Abortion Legislation in U.S. History" (PDF). USCCB. 2008-09-30. Retrieved 2008-11-08.
  13. ^ Kumpel, Robert. "Why Pro-Lifers Fear FOCA" Archived 2009-02-17 at the Wayback Machine The National Catholic Register
  14. ^ Bowman, Matt. "Obama's Gift to America" Archived 2009-04-06 at the Wayback Machine The American Spectator. October 2, 2008.
  15. ^ "Cardinal George Warns Catholic Members of Congress About FOCA -- Opinion Central -- GOPUSA". Archived from the original on 2008-12-28. Retrieved 2009-02-11.
  16. ^ Kmiec Responds to Criticism on Abortion Reduction "Scam" Beliefnet
  17. ^ "Obama's Threat to Catholic Hospitals" Melinda Henneberger writing in Slate
  18. ^ "Sterilization or Abortion" US Code § 300a–7.
  19. ^ "What Would FOCA Really Do?" Emily Douglas writing at RH Reality Check
  20. ^ "Rumors aside, FOCA legislation no threat to Catholic health care" Archived 2009-04-03 at the Wayback Machine Nancy Frazier O'Brien, Catholic News Service, January 27, 2009
  21. ^ "Obama's Threat to Catholic Hospitals" Page 2
  22. ^ Yoest, Charmaine, Ph.D. "An Open Letter to Senator Obama on Behalf of All Ohio Parents" (PDF). Retrieved 2008-11-08.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  23. ^ "Catholic Vote". Archived from the original on 2015-02-25. Retrieved 2014-06-22.
  24. ^ "Jill Stanek".[permanent dead link‍]
  25. ^ "Illinois Federation for Right to Life - Students: 'What the FOCA?!'". www.ifrl.org.
  26. ^ Stolberg, Sheryl (2009-05-14). "On Abortion, Obama Is Drawn Into Debate He Had Hoped to Avoid". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 2022-05-05. Retrieved 2022-05-06.
[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Freedom_of_Choice_Act&oldid=1223357950"