« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

US Catholic Bishops: Executive Order Deal A Non-Starter

Statement from the Bishops:

We’ve consulted with legal experts on the specific idea of resolving the abortion funding problems in the Senate bill through executive order. We know Members have been looking into this in good faith, in the hope of limiting the damage done by abortion provisions in the bill. We believe, however, that it would not be fair to withhold what our conclusion was, as it may help members in assessing the options before them:

“One proposal to address the serious problem in the Senate health care bill on abortion funding, specifically the direct appropriating of new funds that bypass the Hyde amendment, is to have the President issue an executive order against using these funds for abortion. Unfortunately, this proposal does not begin to address the problem, which arises from decades of federal appellate rulings that apply the principles of Roe v. Wade to federal health legislation. According to these rulings, such health legislation creates a statutory requirement for abortion funding, unless Congress clearly forbids such funding. That is why the Hyde amendment was needed in 1976, to stop Medicaid from funding 300,000 abortions a year. The statutory mandate construed by the courts would override any executive order or regulation. This is the unanimous view of our legal advisors and of the experts we have consulted on abortion jurisprudence. Only a change in the law enacted by Congress, not an executive order, can begin to address this very serious problem in the legislation.”

Richard Doerflinger
U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops

If Bart Stupak makes a deal to trade permanent legislation for a promise of a temporary executive order voidable by the courts, the Bishops won’t provide him cover.

Tags:

COMMENTS

  • 4life

    in their unabashed support of life. They were silent when Hitler was exterminating the Jews, they will not be silent for this holocost. And they seem to get press coverage, while Protestent pro-life organizations do not. Will it matter to Stupak and his 12? We will see.

    • mbecker908

      It is nothing more than a statement of legal opinion, it is from “the lawyers”. It is not a theological statement from “the Bishops”.

      Unless and until there is a paragraph that says clearly, “hey bubba, vote for this and your a$$ is excommunicated, you will not be buried on hallowed ground, you will be denied the sacraments if you have the audacity to try to receive them, and we won’t be returning your phone calls.” this is nothing.

      • Sundayjack

        nt.

      • hickorystick

        —–According to these rulings, such health legislation creates a statutory requirement for abortion funding, unless Congress clearly forbids such funding. That is why the Hyde amendment was needed in 1976, to stop Medicaid from funding 300,000 abortions a year. The statutory mandate construed by the courts would override any executive order or regulation.———

        and they leave religious arguments out of it, which, for the moment, is wise.

        • mbecker908

          We’re not talking about a letter from the ABA, we’re talking about the Catholic Bishops. There job isn’t “the law”, it’s Catholic theology and the protection of and propagation of the faith. It is clearly their duty to enforce the teachings of the Church. They’re not doing it.

          • hickorystick

            I’m 100% in favor of Denominational leaders exercising their Free-Speech rationally and forcefully in the Public Square, but until they start throwing ordinary Catholics from the Church for abortions or divorce, what your suggesting is a church using intimidation and a sort of ‘Test Act’ in the legislature.
            If the Catholic Church really believed in eliminating abortion, they would run ads at election time condemning the politicians acting to support abortion as hypocrites and faithless and not worthy to use the Catholic name in their campaign.

          • mbecker908

            I’m talking about excommunicating Catholics who defy Church teaching on life.

            They don’t need to run ads. The Bishops need to excommunicate every Catholic who voted for this. And make it public.

            I don’t want them campaigning or participating in campaigns. I want them upholding Church Doctrine.

          • hickorystick

            Pastor or politician, their all more into their market capture, than morality. They shy away from political fights because their afraid of offending wayward parishioners (all denominations).
            I’m in a really sour mood, so I think I go talk to someone I don’t like. Hopefully that social(ist) worker moron has replied so i can blast him.

    • Swamp_Yankee

      There are many anti-Catholic bigots that have pushed that meme based on falsified research and half truths. Dont go there now. I think the Protestants in Germany were fairly quiet at that time.

      • Doc Holliday

        many people in Europe of all faiths opposed the Holocaust, in fact many did not know it was happening. But this is history and we should focus on the here and now. Do we want socialism in America or do we not?

        • Swamp_Yankee

          But if there was a side swipe at evangelicals, jews or southerners, I wouldnt expect others to sit back. The reference to Hitler was completely irrelevant,

          There is a lot of rhetoric around here thatis out of line when it comes to the Catholic Church and thee Bishops. Why it is tolerated. I dont know.

          But I’ll stand my ground. I was just making a note of it.

          Back to the fight.

    • Doc Holliday

      wrong about generalizing that Catholics were silent on the Holocaust and wrong about protestant groups. Furthermore, I think any real conservative can find this government takeover wrong without even considering abortion. If some want to fight it for purely religious reasons, that is fine, we welcome them, but they are not a part of us, they just agree with us on one thing.

      • 4life

        a Catholic Church statement on abortion gets more media attention than a Protestant pro-life group? That is just my observation. Not that they do more, or accomplish more, just that they seem to get more attention.

    • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
      • 4life

        n/t

    • weatherford

      i am haing trouble finding my tax extension form. anyone got an extra one?

  • mbecker908

    with Nancy’s Papal Office.

    And it’s irrelevant. There are no pro-life Democrats or practicing Catholics in the House. And please note, the word “excommunication” is not in the note. This carries about the same weight with “Catholic” Democrats as a note from my Dead White Cat.

    Oh, and will the Bishops come out against the Reps who vote with the our Infanticide-in-Chief? I think not.

    • 4life

      Catholics in Stupak’s district and this may mean something to them. But who knows.

      • mbecker908

        What in the world ever gave you that idea.

        • nessa

          …graft, pay to play, kickbacks, favors. If Stupak’s 12 were truly in favor of protecting the unborn’s right to life, would they be able to make a deal? They sold their principles to the highest bidder long ago, pro-life for a Dem, like fiscal responsibility is an image to hide behind and garner votes back home from. Nothing more.

        • 4life

          right. Silly me!

  • Robert A. Hahn

    The move is also perilously close to something Nixon once attempted, which he called “impounding” funds that Congress had appropriated. He announced he would not spend them, thus saving taxpayer dollars.

    Nixon lost in the Supreme Court. Presidents can’t “impound” funds that Congress appropriates.

    • IJB

      I personally don’t think the Supreme Court can tell the Executive Branch what to do about ‘Impoundment’, and I hope a brave GOP president uses it again.

      But, like I said, it’s off-topic…

  • Sundayjack

    It’s no wonder USCCB gets ignored with things like this. How serious can they be when John Kerry runs an entire presidential campaign, attends his Sunday masses, and USCCB hands out communion to him as if it were no big deal. How serious can they be when Barack Obama gets the privilege of sharing the table of honor with John McCain at the Al Smith Dinner during the 2008 campaign. How serious can they be when Catholic politicians OPENLY question Catholic doctrine in front of news cameras.

    If they drew a line in the sand once and for all, MAYBE a last minute memo like this might have some teeth. Barack and Nancy has peeled off most of the Stupak group, and will eventually get Bart Stupak himself. Why? Because groups like USCCB let their church members vote their politics, not their conscience; and they let them do it with impunity.

  • miconservative

    the lonely and innocent unborn turn their eyes to you.

    the bishops have not backed down one iota and have been fully engaged throughout. You have been silent for a week!!! The most important week since the Roe v. Wade decision and you are silent!!! Be heard, loudly

    • mbecker908

      At least in terms of things that would matter. They’re putting out letters from their lawyers.

      What they’re NOT doing is acting like Bishops and telling the supposedly Catholic Reps – Nancy especially – vote for this, you’re excommunicated.

      The Bishops are every bit the sellouts that Stupak will be when he finally caves.

      • gnomechumpsky

        Maybe Archbishop Chaput will get this rolling? His anger about this sort of thing has been building for some time. At least that’s my feeling.

  • http://www.suvstrategery.blogspot.com SoFiMil

    The Senate bill, however, has provisions that state Congress *cannot* repeal certain sections of it.

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/12/reid_bill_declares_future_cong_1.asp

    • http://www.suvstrategery.blogspot.com SoFiMil

      The correct approach is a law written by and for the people. That’s what this health care debate was all about, not matter how the vote turns out. An EO would shut the people out again.

      • http://www.suvstrategery.blogspot.com SoFiMil

        .

  • joayn
    • eburke

      This is all about the Stupak block. If they vote no – they have consciences and we win.

      If they vote yes – they have no consciences and we lose.

      That simple. At least the rest of the Dem caucus has the decency to be upfront about being pro-murder.

      There’s a special place in hell for those who are lukewarm in their beliefs or who sell out at the moment when courage is required.

      And if they cave, I will work till my dying breath to see every one them defeated.

      • nessa
      • JSobieski

        nt

  • mavericktime

    All within a 24-hour period.

  • gnomechumpsky

    It’s well past time to show people that promoting the funding of abortion is immoral. It must be doubly so to make it compulsory for others to have to.

  • joayn

    chose sides years and years ago by consistently supporting the Democrat party. If this passes, it’s on their heads.

    • Swamp_Yankee

      Barack Obama and Bill Clinton were Protestants. You really want to count the religion of all the voters. Because the Black Congressional Caucus are all Protestants, and most Jews vote Democratic too. So why dont you throw them in your blame game.

      This crap is sickening.

      • mbecker908

        And I’ll take this no further, but the issue of life is pushed by the Bishops as crucial. Yet they consistently support the agenda of Democrats, knowing full well that the murder of the unborn is the foundational plank in their platform.

        Yes, Jews vote in even bigger relative numbers for Democrats and they get lots of heat hear, and one of their loudest critics is Kenny Solomon.

        As far as Protestants are concerned, they are an amorphous lot at best. Evangelicals are generally pro-life, but you’ll find zero denominations and very few congregations who will say that life issues are as important as the Bishops “say” they are.

        There is more than enough hypocrisy to go around, but of the groups mentioned, the only one that is absolutely hierarchical, has taken what they insist is an absolute stand on the issue and has, as a matter of organization the theological and practical means to punish those who don’t follow the teaching is the Bishops. And they do zip.

        • Swamp_Yankee

          To blame Catholics right now is cowardly, wrong and your right hypocrtical,

          We’ll see what people say Catholic Roberts, Catholic Scalia, Catholic Alito, Catholic Thomas, and Catholic Kennedy saves their *sses again.

          And I’ll take it no further.

        • Swamp_Yankee

          She indicted a whole people, not the Bishops. “Catholics and the majority of Catholic Bishop”. That’s an indictment of my parents, my grandparents, …

          You rushed to defend her smear, but speak of just some Bishops.

          Would you be so passive if someone blamed all “Jews” for the health care bill.

          • mbecker908

            I absolutely ignored the op and responded only on the subject of my choosing which is significantly narrower than her comment.

            On her comment, she is absolutely wrong and I agree with you 100%. My comment is essentially, given the context of the thread, totally off topic and while it might be a subject for a discussion elsewhere, it’s out of line given the original context.

            I apologize. I whack people around all the time for not bothering to read posts before making stupid comments. I’ve obviously stored my brain somewhere and forgotten it. I hope Franz doesn’t find it and think it’s a treat. My bad.

          • Swamp_Yankee

            I guess everyone is a little flustered right now. All the more reason to stay principled and reasonable.

            Personally I hate that stuff, but even strategically, this party and movement has no future without Catholic support. Bobby Jindal, Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, Pat Toomey, … What happens when a curious Hispanic Catholic Rubio supporter decides to become more active, gets involved with a site like only to learn how much latent anti-Catholic still resides in some GOP corners. It’s not good for the cause.

  • jonreagan

    should be to discipline the Nuns……who in spite of taking a vow of obedience, chose to contradict their superiors, and support a measure that would allow taxpayer funding of abortions.

    Any nun who signed the letter of support should be disallowed from receiving the Sacraments, during which time they would be offered pastoral counseling. And if they don’t then shape up and disavow their repudiation of church teaching, they should be excommunicated, period.

  • john_barry

    The Following is the statemen:

    Nancy Pelosi and her allies are currently negotiating with key pro-life Democrats to try and secure their vote for their pro-abortion health care plan.

    What’s on the negotiating table?

    A proposed executive order from President Obama that would allegedly bar abortion funding in the health care bill.

    An executive order is an ineffective maneuver and completely unacceptable.

    Here’s why:

    1. An executive order can be rescinded any time. President Obama could reverse it next week, next month, or next year. Should another pro-abortion president be elected in the future, it could be rescinded on inauguration day.

    2. An executive order will not prevent insurance companies that provide abortion from participating in the exchanges.

    3. Abortion funding in the health care legislation can be only be removed using the legislative process. An executive order not only doesn’t fix the problem, it isn’t needed to fix the problem, and could not stand a legal challenge. If Democrats are serious about protecting taxpayers from funding abortion in the health care bill, they must use the legislative process to fix the problem.

    ACTION:

    Call the following members of Congress immediately and tell them that an executive order by the president on abortion is unacceptable and urge them to vote NO on the pro-abortion health care bill.

    Marion Berry (AR) 202-225-4076
    Kathy Dahlkemper (PA) 202 225-3103
    Daniel Lipinski (IL) 202-225-5701
    Earl Pomeroy (ND) 202-225-2611
    Nick Rahall (WV) 202-225-3452
    Bart Stupak (MI) 202-225-4744
    Steve Driehaus (OH) 202-225-2216
    Joe Donnelly (IN) 202-225-3915
    Jerry Costello (IL) 202-225-5661
    Marcy Kaptur (OH) 202-225-4146
    Paul Kanjorski (PA) 202-225-6511
    Alan Mollohan (WV) 202-225-4172
    Please call now, only a few short hours remain to make your voice heard!

    • http://www.AmericanThinker.com Hammer2008

      **or voice mail boxes full**
      Anyone got another end around?

  • cookcountyconservative

    Yet another back room deal is done.

    For Immediate Release March 21, 2010

    STATEMENT FROM COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR DAN PFEIFFER

    Today, the President announced that he will be issuing an executive order after the passage of the health insurance reform law that will reaffirm its consistency with longstanding restrictions on the use of federal funds for abortion.

    While the legislation as written maintains current law, the executive order provides additional safeguards to ensure that the status quo is upheld and enforced, and that the health care legislation?s restrictions against the public funding of abortions cannot be circumvented.

    The President has said from the start that this health insurance reform should not be the forum to upset longstanding precedent. The health care legislation and this executive order are consistent with this principle.

    The President is grateful for the tireless efforts of leaders on both sides of this issue to craft a consensus approach that allows the bill to move forward.

  • http://www.AmericanThinker.com Hammer2008

    Representative Schauer,

    As I have tried calling all of your offices since Tuesday, this will be my last attempt to reach you regarding the vote on health care today.

    Change your position now or tell your staff to commence sending out resumes now for new jobs come January. For both you and your staff will not have my vote regardless of the outcome should you go along with Speaker Pelosi on today’s health care vote.

    Either you have not done your homework Sir, or you are lying to your constituents when you state:
    ?Passing health care reform will cut costs for Michigan families and businesses, close the prescription drug donut hole for seniors, cut the deficit by $130 billion, ban health insurance companies from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions or the loss of a job, and allow the American people to sign up for the same kind of quality, affordable, private health care plans that are available to members of Congress. I am confident that a modified version of the Senate bill which removes special deals for states like Louisiana and Nebraska will meet these objectives.?

    1. This will not cut the deficit, it will only add to it, despite the ma thematic trickery employed by your caucus. 2. American people are NOT getting the same type of access to private health care as members of Congress. If they were, you would have supported previous measures to fall under the same plan you are voting on.
    3. The Senate version will NOT be modified so the special interests will go through.

    To boot, estimates have it that tax payer funded abortions will increase nearly 40% over the roughly 300,000 funded right now every year. That will be over 100,000 more aborted children you Sir are voting for me Sir, to help fund.

    I take it you are going to claim as Pontius Pilate did, and wash your hands of this blood saying it is not of your doing? If you are a Christian, I sincerely hope come Good Friday, you can hear your own voice say “Crucify him, Crucify him!” For with this vote, for those unborn children, you are.

    I sincerely pray that your future job next year manages to avoid the corruption your last one did, which garnered you the title of the most corrupt Michigan politician in history.

    Good day,
    Mr. Smith

    My congressman’s asinine statement supporting his vote today (talking about “talking points” from Pelosi/Hoyer… sheesh!):

    ?Make no mistake, our health care system is broken. If we do nothing, health insurance companies will continue to raise premiums on Michigan families and businesses by double digits each year for the foreseeable future. This is simply unacceptable, and unsustainable.

    ?Passing health care reform will cut costs for Michigan families and businesses, close the prescription drug donut hole for seniors, cut the deficit by $130 billion, ban health insurance companies from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions or the loss of a job, and allow the American people to sign up for the same kind of quality, affordable, private health care plans that are available to members of Congress. I am confident that a modified version of the Senate bill which removes special deals for states like Louisiana and Nebraska will meet these objectives.?

    ?The health insurance industry has made it perfectly clear that their number one priority is to defend their multi-billion dollar profits at the expense of working Michigan families. In the past few weeks, four different special interest groups have spent nearly $300,000 on attack ads in my district to scare voters and kill health care reform. The bottom line is that I don?t work for the powerful health insurance industry ? I work for the people of Michigan, and passing health care reform will ultimately help get our economy back on track.?

    • http://www.AmericanThinker.com Hammer2008

      http://www.redstate.com/hammer2008/2009/02/25/corrupt-democrats-plus-one-mi-7th-district/

      *no wonder he and POTUS have so much in common