If you're wondering what Senate Democrats decided to give moms for Mother's Day, try dirty, unregulated abortion clinics. While conservatives fight to give women more protection, liberals are trying to send states back to the dark ages of health care. Their latest attempt, Sen. Richard Blumenthal's (D-Conn.) ridiculously named "Women's Health Protection Act," would sweep away virtually every state and local limit on abortion and clinic standards. For the extreme Left, Blumenthal's sweeping proposal is the answer to what they call a "cascading wave of restrictions" in the states.
This great pro-life awakening, which launched a record-breaking number of common sense laws, is helping to break the abortion stronghold on communities across America. And that's exactly what the Left is afraid of. From abortion waiting periods to Planned Parenthood funding bans, the states are doing what voters wish Congress would: cracking down on an industry that destroys lives and exploits women. Like a lot of liberals, Sen. Blumenthal is so desperate to stop this flood of pro-life support that he's willing to trample states rights' to do it.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), meanwhile, has a far more popular push in the works. Exactly one year after Kermit Gosnell's conviction for brutalizing babies, Senate Republicans are demanding the chamber do something about abortion's culture of cruelty. It's been months since Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) promised to "take a look" at Sen. Graham's Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, capping abortion at the 20-week mark when babies can feel excruciating pain.
If Sen. Blumenthal honestly thinks the American people don't want the abortion restrictions they've enacted in dozens of states, then, as Sen. Graham says, "Let's have a vote on both [bills]. I think the topic is worthy of debate... [Sen. Blumenthal] said every Senator needs to be on the record. I agree with that."
Unfortunately for Harry Reid's party, Sen. Graham's bill doesn't just have the support of Republicans but of the majority of Americans. Once they hear the facts on fetal pain, as many as 84 percent of people throw their support behind the five-month ban. And that includes a majority of women, who seem to have a great deal more compassion than Senators like Richard Blumenthal – or even the president, who's already threatened to veto the bill.
As Sen. Roy Blunt pointed out, "You gotta work pretty hard to find anything but a huge majority" supporting this legislation – even in states with the bluest roots. In West Virginia, a similar ban sailed through the House and Senate earlier this year, despite huge Democratic majorities in both. Earlier this week, at a press conference with Senators Graham and Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), FRC and other pro-life groups tried to capitalize on the grassroots momentum and demand a vote for S. 1670.
"Why would medical textbooks and professional anesthesiologists already have come to a general consensus that fetal anesthesia and analgesia are warranted for fetal surgical procedures, were it not for the presence and experience of pain in these tiniest of patients?" asked FRC's Arina Grossu. "Between 20 and 30 weeks post-fertilization, an unborn child has more pain receptors per square inch of skin than at any other time in his or her life, with only a very thin layer of skin for protection." It's time to give these tiny children the real protection that only S. 1670 affords. Contact your senators and urge them to back the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act!