H.R.3 - No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act

To prohibit taxpayer funded abortions and to provide for conscience protections, and for other purposes. view all titles (4)

All Bill Titles

  • Short: No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act as introduced.
  • Official: To prohibit taxpayer funded abortions and to provide for conscience protections, and for other purposes. as introduced.
  • Short: No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act as reported to house.
  • Short: No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act as passed house.

Comments Feed

Displaying 211-238 of 238 total comments.

  • Spam Comment

  • navigation74 03/22/2011 12:51pm

    By making it financially illegal to obtain an abortion, we will only further sink into the mindset of sex=bad. If a woman pays for her own health insurance and has funds available for medical procedures, government needs to stay out of it.

  • txmdcava 04/11/2011 6:36am

    This is total bullshit, the republican don’t care about anything other than their religious ideology. Not one of those Republican Male’s ever bleed out of their vagina. So how is it that they know better about female reproduction? Abortion is not a sin, it is a medical procedure and that is it. Hell I don’t want to pay for the War in Iraq or Afghanistan but congress is doing that anyways. If conservatives don’t want to pay for abortions, then I don’t want to pay for war. No blood for oil using my tax dollars.

  • Comm_reply
    jegan 05/04/2011 11:27pm

    If someone wants to get a voluntary procedure that is not being performed due to rape or medical complications that is completely fine with me. That person can come out of pocket for it the same way anyone else that gets a voluntary medical procedure does.

  • Comm_reply
    kennijudd 09/15/2011 7:40pm

    We already have that law, it’s called the Hyde Amendment. This one goes much further and will have expensive consequences.

  • SEC2AUX 04/13/2011 11:45am

    Don’t make me pay for your stupidity! Period.

  • Moderated Comment

  • wyrmw00d 05/05/2011 1:44pm

    The government shouldn’t provide funding for ANY healthcare accept for military service members. This issue is merely a symptom of a larger problem, that being the problem of government doing too much outside of its constitutionally assigned scope of powers. Most Americans are so used to the idea that government CAN fund personal healthcare that they fail to question the larger resounding issue that is at stake.

    I believe abortion is wrong, but if it’s legal right now, then so be it. But to think that my tax money is potentially paying for someone else to get an abortion? I can think of few tyrannies more reprehensible than that.

  • epicism 05/05/2011 4:27pm

    Really, this is just another subversive tactic by today’s GOP to defund Planned Parenthood without implicitly stating they are.

    It also runs along the lines of their strategy for 2012, which is to place similar ‘Family Values’ based legislation on many state ballots in 2012. The purpose of this legislation is to increase voter turnout among the ‘true believers’, which the GOP is hoping will be enough to bury and counter the severe unpopularity of their stated policies — including this one.

    To me, it’s patently ridiculous that the GOP is wasting time passing this type of legislation; which has absolutely no hope of passing the senate nor the President. For all of their chest-beating about government interference, this is nothing less than their hoping to legislate deeply personal decisions on behalf of women everywhere; something we should all be utterly disgusted about.

  • rpg 05/06/2011 2:21am

    By eliminating, conditionally, a deduction, this bill is actually a tax increase. I didn’t expect the House to pass a tax increase.

  • kindrapring 05/08/2011 7:32am

    Section 203 seems perfectly okay with telling small business owners (and in actuality the text itself is non-specific enough that it could be interpreted as ANY business owner) what sort of plans they can offer to their employees. I would love for one, ONE person to give me an example of a single woman in the last 10 years who has aborted a pregnancy she didn’t get from incest or rape or that didn’t threaten her life or health, because I for the life of me has never heard of a single one. And I know a lot of people who’ve gotten abortions who are low-income enough that they would qualify if such a program existed.

    This is just Republicans, realizing they wrote a check they couldn’t cash with their campaigning, dangling the “abortion” keys in front of the faces of the uniformed masses to distract from the recession.

  • AlphaFemale1968 05/08/2011 9:43pm

    kindraping- so its okay for businesses to chose what kind of health insurance they offer to employees- let me ask you this… most of the time the employee is required to contribute to the cost of that health insurance. So, why shoudln’t the employees have a say is what kind of insurance they can have.
    This is all about republican rhetoric. Save big business, save corporations and in return attack personal freedoms.

  • xcrissxcrossx 05/09/2011 7:25pm

    This bill, while stopping abortions, will also be used as a loophole to restrict or slow down medical care for the poor. It is sad that the GOP tries to call the democrats “socialist” while trying to pass bills like this.

  • b58 05/26/2011 9:12am

    The thing is about abortions is where the government is getting the money to pay for it with. We have Social Security and Medicare and they have dipped into it until they have bankrupt it.They took our money and paying welfare , healthcare,and giving it to illegals and paying for abortions. Washington keeps ponzing our taxpayers money off the same way they did our SS and Medicare money we paid into all our life that they bankrupt it.

  • b58 05/26/2011 9:29am

    Washington refuses to listen to the people on every issue just like the obamacare. The liberals kept on until they passed it behind closed doors and obama signed it against the will of the people and now it is up to a one man vote in court to keep it. A one man vote is where they get a judge that sees it in their favor to rule on a issue. That way the people don’t have a say in what is passed into law. That is how abortion got passed.

  • b58 05/26/2011 9:58am

    The thing is this country has gotten so money hungry that it is big money for adoptions that unless you are rich nobody can afford it. Abortion is big money also that doctors don’t mind aborting babies instead of trying to save a life. Politicians like Pelosi even went to talk to the Pope trying to get him to get the Catholics to go along with abortions also. It is like a human life don’t mean anything anymore these days. Those little unborn babies has not done anything to deserve death at the hands of a abortion doctor.

  • sanityscraps 06/08/2011 12:42pm

    Poor babies don’t want their taxes to pay for something they’re morally against. Guess what? My taxes have paid for multiple wars I never wanted to happen, too. It’s only fair that you holier-than-thou anti-choicers get a turn with this, as well.

    I also support universal health coverage. Abortion is a form of health care. The Hyde Amendment already prevents federal money from being spent on abortions, so all this misogynistic piece of legislation serves to do is tell so many women out there, “Nope. Not rape. I get to decide what rape means.” Hyde should be repealed, as it is discriminatory law, but if all you wanted was no federal funding for abortions, it should have been enough for you.

    Furthermore, redefining rape? REDEFINING RAPE? This is seriously the most misogynistic thing our Congress has seen in a very, very long time.

  • rachelnwmn 06/22/2011 12:20am

    Defunding clinics that provide safe, affordable abortions to lower-income women does not reduce the amount of abortions performed. It simply reduces the number of SAFE abortions performed.

    Morally, I’m against abortion. But I’m also morally against putting hundreds of thousands of American women’s lives at risk because they cannot afford a safe, effective abortion. This isn’t about abortion. This is about women’s health and women’s rights.

  • willtref2000 07/30/2011 8:12am

    How can anyone lobby for less government interference in our lives, with regards to every situation, and then make an exception when it comes to abortion? We do not handle funding of war with the same moral consideration. I assume the argument is “the taking of a life”, how then do I proclaim myself God in determining whether the life of one individual is more sacred than any other? This is hypocrisy at its finest. I thought conservatives desired less regulation…

  • willtref2000 07/30/2011 8:16am

    Why should I pay for healthcare for military members? I didn’t send them into a war we started. How about Congress pay for their medical care or better yet Haliburtion, whose profit margin was the real reason we went there in the first place. Selective socialism is not the answer – specific free healthcare and bank bailouts are not the answer.

  • LordHornswoggle 08/03/2011 4:14pm

    I find abortion reprehensible. That being said, I am firmly pro-choice. The person/people involved made a conscious decision (sans rape or forced conception) to procreate and should deal with the “problem” they made themselves. If having an abortion is morally wrong, from a religious standpoint, then their god/gods will judge them in the end. But I do not feel myself or any other citizen of the US should pay for any others “mistake”. Let them pay for it themselves, or be responsible and raise their child(ren).

  • allyReport101 11/07/2011 5:16am

    The issue hear is not whether abortion is right or wrong, the issue is; Should stolen money be used to kill the unborn>? Im an atheist, but I respect everyone’s right to believe in what ever they want to, our christian neighbors believe abortion is murdering a unborn child, by not supporting this bill you are affectively telling these people, money they earned will be taken by force and used to fund what is to them a mortal sin_ I do not advocate governmental violence against those that wish to abort their own children, but I do ask for you to pay for it yourself, stop advocating violence against me to pay for your mistakes_

  • Spam Comment

  • Vanessa4theunborn 11/26/2011 4:31am

    98% of abortions are done on perfectly healthy babies and mothers. Most of these are coerced by others and not necessarily the choice of the mother. Less than 1% are due to rape or incest, and even then, this violent crimen goes unpunished becuase the only evidence, the child, is gotten rid of.

    If I dont have a say when my money is being spent on abortion then I shouldnt have to pay.

  • Spam Comment

  • Shoachi 02/10/2012 10:58am

    I looked up who got paid money on this. Why in the world are our congress men and women getting money for their vote? We the people already pay them with our taxes so why in the world are they getting money from business? They are suppose to work for us. Disgraceful on all parties.

  • Spam Comment

  • phorv2 07/28/2012 4:03am

    If a woman has committed to the decision to get an abortion she should be able to. If a doctor decides to set up a clinic to perform abortions and has the finances to set one up he/she has that right. However, taxpayer dollars should not fund her abortion nor should taxpayer dollars support the clinic. If the abortion clinic can survive in the marketplace. In that way it becomes a more local issue, one between the woman and her family and the doctor rather than the whole nation.


Vote on This Bill

34% Users Support Bill

727 in favor / 1409 opposed
 

Send Your Rep a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments