Missouri Right to Life Neutral on Raise Your Hands for Kids Tobacco Tax Initiative (RYHFK) – Amendment 3
There is misinformation being circulated in television, radio, Facebook ads and phone calls concerning the Raise Your Hands for Kids Initiative, Amendment 3. Opponents of the initiative are stating that Amendment 3 will place abortion funding in the state constitution. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Clear language has been added to the amendment that prohibits these funds from being used for abortion services or for embryonic stem cell research and cloning. Consequently, Missouri Right to Life is taking a neutral position on the proposed tobacco tax initiative RYHFK because, after careful review, it cannot envision any scenario where the funds could be used for anti-life purposes.
The Raise Your Hands for Kids Tobacco Tax Initiative will:
Go to early childhood education;
Go to educate pregnant women about smoking cessation;
Be available for Private schools, including Christian schools;
Be available for Pregnancy Resource Centers.
Those opposing the RYHFK Tobacco Tax Initiative include those in the business and research communities who support human cloning and life destroying research.
It is those who deceived with Amendment 2 in 2006 who are opposing Amendment 3 because the monies from this tobacco tax initiative will go only to educating children and pregnant women on the dangers of smoking and will not be available to them for open-ended research.
These are the same people who deceived the public with their Amendment 2 initiative in 2006, enshrining the right to clone humans in our state constitution. They said they would never seek public funds, and yet they have been after public funding through our state budget for their life-destroying research through any means possible.
National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) is working with the business and research communities to oppose RYHFK. We can only assume they want unethical research being done and funded by our tax dollars so they can sell baby body parts to researchers.
There is an effort currently underway within the American Medical Association (AMA) to abandon its decades-long position opposing assisted suicide and take a neutral stance. At its July 2017 annual meeting, the AMA will consider taking a “neutral” position which essentially sends a green light to the states that legalizing is acceptable. However, we have recently been made aware that the AMA will hold an interim meeting on November 13 and 14 in Orlando where a special breakout session will be held on assisted suicide.
Both the national and state medical societies’ opposition to doctor-prescribed suicide have been instrumental in stopping the spread of these dangerous laws. In fact, when the Vermont and California medical societies took neutral positions, it was devastating to the efforts in the legislature to block legalization. Assisting suicide is now legal in Oregon, Washington, Vermont, and California, and the practice may have some legal protection in the state of Montana.
We are asking the following things:
1. Please contact one or both contacts below via phone or email.
2. Please restrict arguments to the suggested bullet points, in your own words.
3. Speak with any physicians you know and urge them contact the AMA.
4. Ask for a written response/ report any information received back to NRLC.
1. Who to contact:
Dr. Andrew W. Gurman, MD, AMA President, firstname.lastname@example.org
330 N Wabash, Ste 43482
Chicago IL 60611-5885
Bette Crigger, PhD, CEJA’s Secretary, email@example.com
Secretary, Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs
American Medical Association
330 N Wabash, Ste 43482
Chicago IL 60611-5885
Based on both polling and the positive experience of many states fighting these assisted suicide laws, please try and restrict your arguments to one or two of the following:
2. What to Say:
(Select one or more of the following statements and re-word or add your own thoughts.)
The AMA should retain its longstanding position in opposition to the legalization of assisted suicide because:
· Medical professionals should focus on providing care and comfort to patients – NOT becoming a source of lethal drugs. I would not want my doctor to have this power and suggest suicide to me as an “option.”
· Will the government and insurance companies do the right thing – pay for treatment costing thousands of dollars – or the cheap thing – pay for lethal drugs costing hundreds of dollars?
· Everyone knows someone who has been misdiagnosed or outlived a terminal diagnosis.
· Wanting to die because of depression is treatable. Millions of people are living proof.
· Everyone agrees that dying in pain is unacceptable, however nearly all pain is now treatable. A patient in pain should find a new doctor.
· Oregon is proof that general suicides rise dramatically once assisted suicide is promoted as a “good.”
· My family member could die from taking lethal drugs and I wouldn’t know about it until he/she is dead because no family notification is required in advance.
· Assisted suicide is a recipe for elder and disability abuse because it can put lethal drugs in the hands of abusers.
· A relative who is an heir to the patient’s estate or an abusive caregiver can pick up the lethal drugs and administer them without the patient’s knowledge or consent. There is no oversight and no witnesses are required once the lethal drugs leave the pharmacy
3. Ask for a response:
Please send any replies to firstname.lastname@example.org
“Missouri Right to Life is profoundly disappointed in the U.S. Supreme Court decision overturning the Texas law that requires protective measures for women seeking abortion. Missouri passed similar laws in 2005. These laws requiring that an abortionist have hospital privileges within 30 miles of the abortion clinic and that abortion clinics follow the same procedures as all ambulatory surgical centers are common sense safety measures and not undue burdens,” said Steve Rupp, President of Missouri Right to Life.
President Rupp continued, “This decision allows the abortion industry to operate unsafe clinics and with little oversight. The court ignored recent cases of medical negligence, manslaughter and murder carried out in abortion clinics in Pennsylvania and Texas. Today the court advanced the abortion agenda over the protection of women’s health.”
“Missouri Right to Life will continue to work to pass legislation to protect innocent babies and women,” Rupp concluded.
The following statement was received from National Right to Life:
WASHINGTON (June 27, 2016 — NRLC) – By a vote of 5-3, the U.S. Supreme Court today struck provisions of a Texas law requiring abortion clinics to meet the same standards as ambulatory surgical centers and requiring abortionists to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital in case of medical emergencies (with certain exceptions.) The Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals previously rejected facial attacks on both provisions.
“How shabby are these abortion clinics that they cannot meet the minimum standards other outpatient surgical centers are required to meet, and just how bad are these abortionists that they can’t get admitting privileges at a local hospital?,” said Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life. “As we saw with Kermit Gosnell in Philadelphia, it’s clear that the lucrative abortion industry is not able or willing to police itself and allows filthy, deplorable conditions to go unchecked.”
The provisions struck by the Court today were part of a broader pro-life omnibus package passed by the Texas legislature in 2013. Texas HB2 also included National Right to Life model language to protect unborn children who are capable of experiencing great pain when being killed by dismemberment or other late abortion methods. An unborn child is capable of feeling pain by 20 weeks after fertilization and earlier. That provision of the law was unchallenged in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt.
“In the years following Roe v. Wade, the Court exhibited extreme hostility to regulation of abortion as a medical procedure,” said Tobias. “However, in its 1992 Casey decision, the Court turned a corner, rejecting the idea of it being ‘the country’s ex officio medical board’. Today, they reversed course and decided that they know better than representatives duly elected by the people of the United States.”
National Right to Life’s Brief of Amicus Curiae in the case is available here:
Guest speaker for the MRL PAC portion of the meeting will be James Harris. Harris has been a political strategist for several years and has worked on campaigns in 12 states and at the national level. Over the years, clients have included several members of Congress, gubernatorial campaigns, and Fortune 500 companies. Harris has served as an advisor to several members of Congress, assisting the campaigns of Congressman Blaine Luetkemeyer, Congressman Billy Long, and Congressman John Carter. In addition, Harris served on the national finance committee for multiple presidential campaigns.Harris will inform us of the importance of and challenges in the upcoming election and how we can be involved in our communities across Missouri. Harris resides in Jefferson City, with his wife Jillian, their daughter Margaux, and their son Jack. They are members of the Cathedral of St. Joseph.
Other speakers will be Steve Rupp, president, Susan Klein and Jerry Nieters with the legislative department and Dave Plemmons, MRL PAC chairman.
The following is a statement from Steve Rupp, President of Missouri Right to Life:
The St. Louis Fire Department released a report of the medical emergency calls placed by the St. Louis Planned Parenthood abortion mill from 1/1/09 through 4/6/16. This report was released in the settlement of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed against it by Operation Rescue in 2013. The report showed that 58 emergency calls were placed requiring ambulance services at the St. Louis Planned Parenthood abortion mill. Many of these calls were due to life-threatening conditions. On May 13, 2016, an additional ambulance was seen at the St. Louis Planned Parenthood. Clearly, the facility is a danger to women, as well as their babies.
Missouri Right to Life has written and lobbied for the passage of a law that would require more detailed reporting and regular, frequent, and thorough inspections and audits of abortion mills. These requirements will hold the abortion industry accountable. Sadly, this legislation has not passed both the House and the Senate.
There is no sign that Planned Parenthood will cease its barbaric practices. How many more women will be harmed before the Missouri legislature sends this bill to the Governor?
Missouri Right to Life is seeking to fill the new position of Field Development Director. This individual would maintain and expand the existing organizational structure, setting up new chapters statewide. This person must exhibit a passion for the pro-life cause, have excellent communication skills, both oral and written, have organizational skills and the ability to multi-task.
A degree in communications, marketing or similar field desired but not required. Must be able to travel regularly and be willing to work both day and evening hours and weekends when necessary.
Position would be based out of Jefferson City. A vehicle and driver’s license are required. Please email or send your resume to Patty Skain, PO Box 651, Jefferson City MO 65102, email@example.com.
2016 Legislative Session Comes to a Close: Bill to Prevent the Sale of Aborted Babies Fails to Pass the Senate
While the House passed multiple pro-life bills, the Senate chose not to pass what the House sent over to them.
HB 2069, a substantive bill ensuring that babies’ bodies and body parts from abortion are not being sold for profit was never taken up for discussion. HB 2069 passed the House with a bi-partisan veto proof majority of a 120 votes. There is no reason for the Senate not to have sent HB 2069 to the Governor.
We are grateful for the work of the House and Senate Appropriation committees for funding positive pro-life programs passed in previous years (see below). These programs are changing hearts and minds.
But, if the legislators want to stop the killing of babies in abortion clinics, they MUST also pass legislation regulating abortion. The laws we are relying on right now in all the attacks from Planned Parenthood and the courts are because legislators stood up and passed laws regulating the abortion industry.
Why, with a pro-life super-majority, has the Missouri senate not passed important pro-life legislation? Missouri Right to Life has long believed that the abortion industry and the research industry are intrinsically connected. Missouri Right to Life has also made it clear that there should be a distinction between ethical and unethical research when working on public policies and funding.
While pro-lifers support passage of funding for good pro-life programs, defunding $380,000 from Planned Parenthood from our state budget and continuing further investigations of Planned Parenthood, we stand unified in the belief that significant pro-life legislation regulating the abortion industry and prohibiting the sale of baby body parts must be passed.
Until we can stop the killing of these innocent babies at the earliest stages of development from abortion or research, we must pass substantive legislation regulating these industries. Missouri Right to Life looks forward to working with the House and the Senate to pass substantive pro-life legislation in the years to come.
Budget Bills With Pro-Life Provisions:
- Alternative to Abortion Funding
- Maintained pro-life protective language on Dept. of Economic Development bill to prevent public monies from being used for research on aborted babies, embryos, and human cloning.
- For the purpose of providing expansion of courier services for delivery of cord blood to the St. Louis Cord Blood Bank at SSM Cardinal Glennon Hospital.
- Show-Me Healthy Babies Program Funding.
- Family planning dollars in the state budget ($380,000) will now be funded by the state and not the federal government. These monies can be used for family planning provided that none of the funds appropriated may be expended to directly or indirectly subsidize abortion services or procedures or administrative functions and none of the funds appropriated may be paid or granted to an organization that provides abortion services.
Better Health Care for Women that does not include abortion!