Congressman Chris Smith (R-NJ) is a co-sponsor of H.R. 7

(Washington, DC)  U.S. House of Representatives passed the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act of 2017 (H.R. 7) by a vote of 238 to 183 on Tuesday. The bill was co-sponsored by Congressmen Chris Smith (R-NJ) and Dan Lipinski (D-IL). If passed by the Senate and signed into the law the bill establishes a permanent, government-wide prohibition on federal funding for abortion, prohibits federal subsidies in the form of Obamacare tax credits for health plans that include abortion, and strengthens disclosure requirements for unsubsidized plans that include abortion.

“Two million people who would have been aborted instead survived because public funds were unavailable to effectuate their violent demise, while their mothers benefited from prenatal health care and support,” said Smith said during his comments on the floor of the House advocating for the bill. “Two million survivors have had the opportunity to live and enjoy the first and most basic of all human rights—the right to life.”

More than twenty peer reviewed studies indicate that over two million lives have been saved since the Hyde Amendment was introduced in 1976, according to a report from late last year by the Charlotte Lozier Institute.

Marist poll released yesterday found that a majority of Americans (61 percent) oppose taxpayer funding of abortion, including 40 percent of those who say they are “pro-choice” and 41 percent of Democrats.

“The SBA List is grateful for the bipartisan leadership of pro-life Representatives Chris Smith and Dan Lipinski in advancing this much needed legislation to stop taxpayer funding of abortion,” said Susan B. Anthony List President Marjorie Dannenfelser. “Pro-life women legislators led the debate on the floor today including Representatives Diane Black, Liz Cheney, Virginia Foxx, Vicky Hartzler, Mia Love, Kristi Noem, Martha Robey, and Ann Wagner. We are encouraged and thankful for their leadership, which is further evidence of the broad support this policy has among women.

“House passage of this legislation is the first step towards fulfilling a promise made by President Trump to keep taxpayers out of the abortion business. He and his administration are working for the American people, not the abortion lobby. We urge the U.S. Senate to follow suit so that this bill can get to President Trump’s desk as soon as possible,” Dannenfelser concluded.

Other pro-life leaders joined in praising the members of the House who voted in favor of this bill.

“I applaud the House of Representatives for passing the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act. Taxpayers should not be forced to pay for abortions,” Penny Nance, President and CEO of Concerned Women for America, said in a released statement. “The idea that women can only be successful at the cost of their child’s life is patently false. To demand that be done on the taxpayer’s dime only adds insult to injury. Children do not inhibit upward mobility, but provide motivation for it.”

“I strongly urge the Senate to swiftly take up this bill and send it to President Trump’s desk and make this longstanding provision permanent law,” Nance added.

Carol Tobias, National Right to Life President, said, “With today’s vote, we are one step closer to getting the federal government out of the business of paying for abortion once and for all. The 183 House members who voted against the bill will be firmly marked as supporters of federal funding for elective abortion.”

You May Also Like

Memorial Day: Reflecting on the True Price of Freedom

Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) offers a Memorial Day reflection on the sacrifices made for the freedoms we all enjoy.

302 Women, So Far, Promise to Kill Their Children.

Your neighbor may be among the potential killers, many of them young,…

Congress introduces bills to nullify all state restrictions on abortion

A deceptively-titled “Women’s Health Protection Act” has been introduced in the U.S.…

You Can’t Multiply Wealth By Dividing It

Something for those who are into “wealth redistribution” to consider.  The following…