Gazizza.Net

Pro-Life Democrat Bob Casey Casts Strange Votes for Abortion Funding

Democrats who take a strong stand against abortion are few and far between -- especially in the United States Senate. When Bob Casey defeated Rick Santorum for a Pennsylvania seat in the Senate pro-life advocates hoped Casey would vote the same as his predecessor; but, Casey cast his first pro-abortion vote last week. ... Boxer's amendment overturns the policy that President Reagan first instituted and President Bush revived in 2001 that protects taxpayers from funding groups that perform or promote abortions overseas.

Pro-life groups strongly opposed the Boxer Amendment, but it was adopted on a 53-41 vote. Just 20 minutes later, pro-life Sen. Sam Brownback offered an amendment to undo the Boxer amendment but senators defeated it by the same margin.

Casey voted for the Boxer amendment and but also for the Brownback amendment -- taking a seemingly contradicting stand on the abortion funding issue.

On Monday, as David Freddoso of National Review notes, Casey said on the Senate floor that he had made a mistake -- but not because he voted to fund foreign abortions and abortion advocacy.

He said that, on the pro-life Brownback amendment, “it was my intention to vote ‘nay.’ Therefore, I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to change my vote since it will not affect the outcome of that vote.”

In other words, he feels so strongly about funding these groups that he asked that his vote be changed so that he could be recorded as supporting funding groups that support abortion. He argues that since it's illegal to spend this money on abortion directly, his vote does not support abortion. The problem with this, as the linked article points out, is that money is fungible; that is, it can be easily moved from one budget line-item to another. So giving money to a group to spend on budget line item 13.A.3, which you support, can free up money for them to spend more money under line item 17.C.2.a, which you vehemently oppose. The thing is, as former Auditor General and State Treasurer in Pennsylvania, Casey should (and likely does) know that.

Here's an example: would you give money to the Ku Klux Klan to support, say, a food for the poor drive? Of course not, that would free up some money for them to pursue their hateful activities and give them some positive publicity that might make them look good in the eyes of more people than they already unfortunately do. Instead, you'd give the money to a worthy charity who would help feed the poor without all the baggage that the KKK brings.

Similarly, we shouldn't give money to any organization who supports, performs or promotes abortions, even if that money won't be going directly to their abortion advocacy: it still will make them look better and free up money to spend on the slaughter of the unborn.

This is just one more example of how pro-life Democrats inevitably cave on the issue of the right to life of unborn children when they reach national office. They'll campaign as pro-lifers but when the rubber hits the road, they line up with those seeking the death of innocent children. Whether they're deliberately lying to us, or simply caving under pressure from the rabidly pro-abortion Democrat party, the result is the same: there are no pro-life Democrats at the national level. If you want to defend the right to life of unborn children, the Republican Party unfortunately offers the only option, and a shaky one at that.