Murrand and Cantwele Support Born Again Bill

	Maria Cantwell on Abortion Democratic Jr Senator (WA)

Roe v. Wade is US law and WA police force, so uphold it

Q: What�south your position on ballgame?

GUTHRIE: Yous accept the right to medical liberty. You get to choose the procedures that you undergo, not politicians. Your private right translates into a woman�s correct for reproductive liberty. I�g pro-option.

McGAVICK: Fractional birth abortion should not exist used every bit a loophole; and taxpayers should be forced to pay for abortion. With underage pregnancies, parents accept a right to be involved with that determination. Within these boundaries, I believe pick should exist.

CANTWELL: I support Roe v. Wade. It has been the law of the land for 30 years. More chiefly, it has been voted on, by initiative, ad adopted by the people of this state. That�south why I work to uphold that women have full access to reproductive healthcare choices that is both the national law and the law of this state. I think information technology�s important to support, with federal dollars, those programs that give total access, and don�t discriminate against women who can�t afford that access.

Source: Washington Senate Debate hosted by Male monarch-5 on 2006 election , October 17, 2006

Votes against Ashcroft, citing reproductive rights

Senator Ashcroft has taken positions on reproductive rights -- an consequence of critical importance to women in this country -- that are clearly outside the mainstream of public opinion. His record of pushing legislation limiting the right to a legal abortion and contraception, as Missouri Attorney General, Governor, and Senator, have caused bang-up anxiety for many in my state. Every bit Missouri Attorney General, he took up numerous cases in his crusade to challenge the Roe v. Wade decision.

As my colleague Sen. Leahy stated previously, �at that place is no appointed position within the Federal Government that tin affect more than lives in more ways than the attorney general--nosotros all expect to the attorney general to ensure even-handed law enforcement; equal justice for all; (and) protection of our basic constitutional rights.� The bottom line is that: I am non convinced that Senator Ashcroft will enforce the letter and spirit of the constabulary in the area of women�due south reproductive rights.

Source: Printing Release, �Ashcroft� , Jan 30, 2001

100% pro option

Q: How does your position on a woman�s right to choose bear on your support of babyhood issues?

A: I�m very supportive of programs like planned parenthood and dollars that are used to educate women about their choices. And that means the whole spectrum of choices. I am pro-choice, and 100% pro-choice on my voting record, unlike Senator Gorton. But I also believe besides a woman�s right to choose, she should take information. She should know what her options are. I think this is where senator Gorton and I differ, and on issues of public financing, its non just that there�s - there are bills where women take private financing in public ways. So to aid women make their choices, whether they want to save the child, for adoption, or whether they want to choose. And Senator Gorton doesn�t back up those options, and I�1000 very concerned that as someone who would be there in the US Senate that has voted confronting codifying Roe v. Wade, that we wouldn�t accept a Senator that would make the right choices.

Source: Spokane Rotary Debate , Oct 26, 2000

Strongly supports �Ballgame is a adult female�s right�

Personal decisions such as this should not be made for u.s.a. by the government. All women deserve admission to prophylactic and legal abortion services. - Cantwell

While serving in Congress, Cantwell had the opportunity to vote 32 times on the abortion upshot, and on every vote, she took a strong pro-option position. This included votes supporting: Federal and private insurance coverage of abortion, medical privacy and availability of reproductive services for minors, access for armed forces personnel and prisoners.

Source: www.cantwell2000.com , Sep 21, 2000

Voted NO on restricting United nations funding for population control policies.

Congressional Summary: To require that amounts appropriated for the United Nations Population Fund are not used by organizations which support coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization.

Proponent's argument to vote Yes: Sen. WICKER (R-MS): This amendment with one consequence and i effect merely--whether U.s. taxpayer dollars will be provided to assist fund coercive population control policies, such as China's one-child policy--a policy that relies on coerced abortion and forced sterilization. Specifically, this pro-kid, pro-family, pro-woman amendment would restore the Kemp-Kasten antipopulation control provision, which has been a key function of our foreign policy for most a quarter century. As it has always washed, Kemp-Kasten allows the President to certify that funds are non used for coercive family practices. My amendment is needed because the underlying neb reverses this longstanding provision.

Sen. COBURN (R-OK): I stand in the corner of pro-life. But I want to argue this issue as if I were pro-option. If nosotros believe that women have a right to choose, why in the world would we send money to UNFP that is going to have that right away from women in other countries? You can't be on both sides of this event. Either you believe in a woman's correct to choose or you do not. Or you lot only believe in a woman's right to choose in America, and because the Chinese have too many people, you lot don't think that same human right ought to be given to women in Communist china. In that location is no question that UNFP will mix this coin, and we will fund forced abortions in People's republic of china. [Without this amendment] American taxpayer dollars are going to get to China to enforce coercive abortion against the will of women and force sterilization confronting the will of women in China.

Opponent'southward argument to vote No: None spoke against the amendment.

Reference: Wicker Amdt.; Bill S.Amdt.607 to H.R.1105 ; vote number 2009-S081 on Mar v, 2009

Voted NO on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP.

CONGRESSIONAL SUMMARY: To require that legislation to reauthorize SCHIP include provisions codifying the unborn kid regulation. Amends the definition of the term "targeted depression-income child" to provide that such term includes the period from conception to birth, for eligibility for child health assistance.

SUPPORTER'Southward ARGUMENT FOR VOTING YES: Sen. ALLARD: This subpoena will codify the current unborn child rule by amending the SCHIP reauthorization reserve fund. This amendment will clarify in statute that the term "child" includes the menstruation from conception to birth. This is a pro-life vote. OPPONENT'S ARGUMENT FOR VOTING NO: Sen. FEINSTEIN: Nosotros already clarified SCHIP law that a pregnant woman's coverage under SCHIP law is optional. We made it obligatory so every pregnant woman has the advantage of medical insurance. This amendment undoes that. Information technology takes it away from the woman and gives it to the fetus. At present, if a pregnant woman is in an accident, loses the child, she does not get coverage, the child gets coverage. We already solved the problem. If you lot encompass the significant woman, yous cover her fetus. What Senator Allard does is remove the coverage from the pregnant adult female and cover the fetus. LEGISLATIVE Upshot: Subpoena rejected, 46-52

Reference: Bill S.Amdt.4233 to S.Con.Res.70 ; vote number 08-S081 on Mar 14, 2008

Voted NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion.

CONGRESSIONAL SUMMARY: To increase funding for the vigorous enforcement of a prohibition against taking minors across State lines in circumvention of laws requiring the involvement of parents in abortion decisions consistent with the Child Custody Protection Act.

SUPPORTER'S Statement FOR VOTING YES: Sen. ENSIGN: This amendment enables enforcing the Kid Custody Protection Human activity, which passed the Senate in a bipartisan fashion by a vote of 65 to 34. Likewise many times we enact laws, and we practise not fund them. This is going to ready funding then the law that says we are going to protect young children from being taken across State lines to have a surgical abortion--we are going to brand sure those people are protected. OPPONENT'Due south Argument FOR VOTING NO: Sen. BOXER: Nosotros already voted for $50 one thousand thousand to enhance the enforcement of child protective laws. If Sen. Ensign'due south bill becomes law, and then that money is already there to be used for such a program. LEGISLATIVE Issue: Amendment rejected, 49-49 (1/2 required, or 50 votes; Sen. Byrd & Sen. McCain absent)

Reference: Bill S.Amdt.4335 to S.Con.Res.70 ; vote number 08-S071 on Mar 13, 2008

Voted NO on barring HHS grants to organizations that perform abortions.

Vote on an amendment, South.AMDT.3330, to H.R.3043 (HHS Appropriations Bill): To prohibit the provision of funds to grantees who perform abortions, with exceptions for maternal health.

Proponents support voting Yeah because:

Sen. VITTER: Whatever side of the abortion debate y'all are on, we can all hold on one thing: Abortion is a very divisive topic. In that context, I remember it is the right policy to say we are not going to ship taxpayer dollars to support groups that perform abortions. Now, the other side will say: Well, nosotros take electric current Federal constabulary that says we are not going to use taxpayer dollars to fund abortions. But, quite bluntly, that is non good enough. Considering now, we transport Federal dollars to abortion providers and money is fungible--it is a large shell game and it supports their organizations and, in many cases, that funding is a huge percentage of their overall acquirement.

Alphabetic character of Support from Family Inquiry Council:

Recent reports indicate that Planned Parenthood generated over $900 million in income in 2006, of which over $300 1000000 came from government. Nosotros should not be sending taxpayer coin to an organization such as Planned Parenthood that performs abortions. Your support for the Vitter amendment will uphold the principle that the US taxpayer should not have to subsidize the abortion industry.

Opponents recommend voting NO because:

Sen. BOXER: The Vitter subpoena is "Big Brother" at its very worst. It tells not-governmental entities how they should spend their own private funds. This amendment punishes the very organizations that work hard every twenty-four hour period using their ain funds to provide family planning services and reproductive health care, including legal abortion services. If Sen. Vitter wants to deny these funds, he should work to outlaw all abortion. That is an honest way. Merely to punish a private organization that works to give women a full array of reproductive wellness intendance is really, I recollect, a very distressing idea.

Reference: Vitter Subpoena to HHS/Education/Labor Appropriations; Bill S.Amdt. 3330 to H.R. 3043 ; vote number 2007-379 on Oct 18, 2007

Voted Yep on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines.

Allows federal funding for research that utilizes homo embryonic stem cells, regardless of the date on which the stalk cells were derived from a human embryo, provided such embryos:

have been donated from in vitro fertilization clinics;
were created for the purposes of fertility handling;
were in excess of the needs of the individuals seeking such treatment and would otherwise be discarded; and
were donated by such individuals with written informed consent and without any fiscal or other inducements.

Proponents support voting YES because:

Since 2 years ago, the final Stem Cell pecker, public back up has surged for stem cells. Research is proceeding unfettered and, in some cases, without ethical standards in other countries. And even when these countries have ethical standards, our failures are assuasive them to gain the scientific border over the US. Some suggest that it is Congress' role to tell researchers what kinds of cells to use. I suggest we are not the arbiters of research. Instead, nosotros should foster all of these methods, and we should adequately fund and have upstanding oversight over all upstanding stem cell research.

Opponents back up voting NO because:

A good bargain has changed in the earth of science. Amniotic fluid stalk cells are now available to open a wide new surface area of research. I think the American people would welcome us having a hearing to understand more about this promising new surface area of science. As it stands today, we volition just have to debate the bill on the merits of information that is well over 2 years old, and I call up that is unfortunate.

The contempo findings of the pluripotent epithelial cells demonstrates how quickly the globe has inverse. Wouldn't it be dainty to have the researcher before our committee and be able to ask those questions so we may make the best possible judgment for the American people?
Status: Vetoed by Pres. Bush Bill passed, 63-34

Reference: Stalk Prison cell Research Enhancement Deed; Beak S.v & H.R.3 ; vote number 2007-127 on Apr 11, 2007

Voted NO on notifying parents of minors who leave-of-land abortions.

This bill prohibits taking minors across State lines in circumvention of laws requiring the involvement of parents in abortion decisions. Makes an exception for an ballgame necessary to relieve the life of the minor. Authorizes any parent to sue unless such parent committed an act of incest with the minor. Imposes a fine and/or prison house term of upwards to i twelvemonth on a physician who performs an abortion on an out-of-country minor in violation of parental notification requirements in their home land.

Proponents recommend voting Yes because:

This bill deals with how immature girls are beingness secretly taken beyond State lines for the purpose of abortion, without the consent of their parents or even the knowledge of their parents, in violation of the laws of the State in which they live. 45 states take enacted some sort of parental consent laws or parental notification police force. By merely secreting a child beyond State lines, one can frustrate the State legislature's rules. It is subverting and defeating valid, constitutionally canonical rights parents accept.

Opponents recommend voting NO considering:

Some States have parental consent laws, some don't. In my particular State, it has been voted down because my people feel that if you ask them, "Do they want their kids to come to their parents?", absolutely. But if y'all enquire them, "Should y'all strength them to do then, even in circumstances where at that place could be trouble that comes from that?", they say no.

This bill emanates from a want that our children come to us when we accept family unit matters, when our children are in trouble, that they not be fearful, that they not be afraid that they disappoint us, that they be open with us and loving toward usa, and we toward them. This is what we want to accept happen. The question is: Can Big Brother Federal Regime force this on our families? That is where we will differ.

Reference: Kid Interstate Abortion Notification Act; Bill South.403 ; vote number 2006-216 on Jul 25, 2006

Voted YES on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy past education & contraceptives.

Vote to prefer an amendment to the Senate'due south 2006 Fiscal Year Budget that allocates $100 1000000 for the prevention of unintended pregnancies. A Yeah vote would expand access to preventive health care services that reduce unintended pregnancy (including teen pregnancy), reduce the number of abortions, and improve access to women's health intendance. A YES vote would:

Increase funding and access to family unit planning services
Funds legislation that requires equitable prescription coverage for contraceptives nether health plans
Funds legislation that would create and expand teen pregnancy prevention programs and pedagogy programs apropos emergency contraceptives

Reference: Appropriation to expand access to preventive wellness care services; Bill South.Amdt. 244 to Due south Con Res 18 ; vote number 2005-75 on Mar 17, 2005

Voted NO on criminal punishment for harming unborn fetus during other crime.

Bill would brand it a criminal crime to harm or kill a fetus during the committee of a violent law-breaking. The measure out would gear up criminal penalties, the aforementioned as those that would apply if harm or death happened to the pregnant woman, for those who harm a fetus. Information technology is non required that the individual have prior knowledge of the pregnancy or intent to damage the fetus. This nib prohibits the death penalty from being imposed for such an offense. The bill states that its provisions should non be interpreted to apply a woman'southward actions with respect to her pregnancy. Reference: Unborn Victims of Violence Deed; Bill Southward.1019/HR.1997 ; vote number 2004-63 on Mar 25, 2004

Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life.

South. 3 As Amended; Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Deed of 2003. Vote to pass a bill banning a medical process, which is usually known as "partial-birth" ballgame. Those who performed this procedure would and then face fines and up to two years in prison, the women to whom this process is performed on are non held criminally liable. This bill would make the exception for cases in which a women's life is in danger, non for cases where a women's health is in danger. Reference: Bill Due south.3 ; vote number 2003-51 on Mar 12, 2003

Endorsed Recommended by EMILY'south List of pro-choice women.

Cantwell is endorsed past EMILY's list, a pro-selection PAC:

EMILY�s Listing operates as a donor network, recommending pro-pick Autonomous women candidates to its members, who contribute directly to the candidates they choose. In the 1999-2000 ballot cycle, EMILY�south List members contributed $9.iii million to pro-selection Democratic women candidates. In its 16-year history, EMILY�s List has helped to elect iv women governors, eleven women to the U.s. Senate and 53 women to the U.S. House of Representatives. �Women continue to be the power players in Democratic politics,� said Ellen R. Malcolm, president of EMILY's List. �In 2002, redistricting could result in every bit many as 75 open seats, creating multiple opportunities to recruit and elect pro-choice Autonomous women.�

Source: Printing Release on Diane Watson (CA-32) victory 01-EL1 on Apr eleven, 2001

Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-option voting record.

Cantwell scores 100% by NARAL on pro-choice voting record

For over 30 years, NARAL Pro-Choice America has been the political arm of the pro-pick motion and a strong abet of reproductive liberty and choice. NARAL Pro-Choice America's mission is to protect and preserve the right to choose while promoting policies and programs that improve women's health and make abortion less necessary. NARAL Pro-Selection America works to educate Americans and officeholders well-nigh reproductive rights and health problems and elect pro-choice candidates at all levels of government. The NARAL ratings are based on the votes the organization considered most important; the numbers reverberate the pct of time the representative voted the organization's preferred position.

Source: NARAL website 03n-NARAL on Dec 31, 2003

Aggrandize embryonic stem cell enquiry.

Cantwell signed a alphabetic character from 58 Senators to the President

Honey Mr. President:

We write to urge you to expand the current federal policy concerning embryonic stem cell inquiry.

Embryonic stem cells take the potential to exist used to treat and better empathise deadly and disabling diseases and conditions that affect more than than 100 million Americans, such as cancer, heart disease, diabetes, Parkinson'south, Alzheimer's, multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injury, and many others.

We capeesh your words of support for the enormous potential of this enquiry, and we know that you intended your policy to help promote this enquiry to its fullest. As you know, the Assistants's policy limits federal funding only to embryonic stalk cells that were derived by August 9, 2001.

Withal, scientists accept told us that since the policy went into outcome more than two years ago, we have learned that the embryonic stem cell lines eligible for federal funding will non be suitable to effectively promote this research. We therefore feel it is essential to relax the restrictions in the current policy for this research to exist fully explored.

Among the difficult challenges with the electric current policy are the post-obit:

While it originally appeared that 78 embryonic stalk jail cell lines would be available for research, only 19 are available to researchers.
All available stem cell lines are contaminated with mouse feeder cells, making their therapeutic use for humans uncertain.
It is increasingly difficult to attract new scientists to this area of research because of concerns that funding restrictions will proceed this research from being successful.
Despite the fact that U.S. scientists were the first to derive human embryonic stalk cells, leadership in this area of enquiry is shifting to other countries.

We would very much similar to work with you to modify the current embryonic stem cell policy so that it provides this expanse of inquiry the greatest opportunity to pb to the treatments and cures for which we are all hoping. Source: Alphabetic character from 58 Senators to the President 04-SEN8 on Jun four, 2004

Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance.

Cantwell scores 0% by the NRLC on ballgame problems

OnTheIssues.org interprets the 2006 NRLC scores every bit follows:

0% - fifteen%: pro-choice stance (approx. 174 members)
16%- 84%: mixed tape on abortion (approx. 101 members)
85%-100%: pro-life stance (approx. 190 members)

Well-nigh the NRLC (from their website, world wide web.nrlc.org):

The ultimate goal of the National Correct to Life Committee is to restore legal protection to innocent human life. The primary interest of the National Correct to Life Committee and its members has been the abortion controversy; however, it is besides concerned with related matters of medical ethics which chronicle to the correct to life issues of euthanasia and infanticide. The Committee does not have a position on issues such as contraception, sexual activity education, capital letter punishment, and national defense. The National Right to Life Committee was founded in 1973 in response to the Roe vs. Wade Supreme Court decision, legalizing the practise of human abortion in all 50 states, throughout the entire nine months of pregnancy.

The NRLC has been instrumental in achieving a number of legislative reforms at the national level, including a ban on non-therapeutic experimentation of unborn and newborn babies, a federal conscience clause guaranteeing medical personnel the right to refuse to participate in abortion procedures, and various amendments to appropriations bills which prohibit (or limit) the employ of federal funds to subsidize or promote abortions in the United States and overseas.

In add-on to maintaining a lobbying presence at the federal level, NRLC serves as a clearinghouse of data for its state affiliates and local chapters, its individual members, the press, and the public.

Source: NRLC website 06n-NRLC on Dec 31, 2006

Ban anti-abortion limitations on ballgame services.

Cantwell co-sponsored Women'southward Wellness Protection Act

Congressional summary: : Women's Health Protection Deed: makes the following limitations concerning abortion services unlawful and prohibits their imposition or awarding by whatsoever regime:

a requirement that a medical professional perform specific tests, unless generally required in the case of medically comparable procedures;
a limitation on an abortion provider's ability to delegate tasks;
a limitation on an ballgame provider's ability to prescribe or manipulate drugs based on her or his skillful-faith medical judgment;
a requirement or limitation concerning the physical plant, equipment, staffing, or hospital transfer arrangements;
a requirement that, prior to obtaining an abortion, a woman brand medically unnecessary visits to the provider of abortion services or to whatsoever private or entity that does non provide such services;
a prohibition or ban prior to fetal viability

Opponent's statement against (Alive Action News): This is Roe 5. Wade on steroids. The bill is problematic from the very beginning. Its offset finding addresses "women'southward ability to participate equally"; many take rejected this merits that women need abortion in lodge to exist equal to men, or that they need to be like men at all. The sponsors of this pro-abortion bill as well seem to feel that pro-life bills take had their time in this country, and that we must now plow back to ballgame. The pecker too demonstrates that its proponents take likely not fifty-fifty bothered attempting to understand the laws they are seeking to undo, considering that such laws are in place to regulate abortion in order to make it safer. Those who feel that abortion is best left upwardly for united states to make up one's mind will also notice this nib problematic with its overreach. Sadly, the bill besides uses the Fourteenth Amendment to justify abortion, every bit the Supreme Court did, fifty-fifty though in actuality it would make much more sense to protect the lives of unborn Americans.

Source: H.R.3471 & South.1696 14-S1696 on November 13, 2013

Access safe, legal abortion without restrictions.

Cantwell co-sponsored South.217 & H.R.448

Congressional Summary: Congress finds the post-obit:

These restrictions harm women's wellness past reducing admission to the other essential wellness care services offered past the providers targeted by the restrictions, including contraceptive services.
The cumulative event of these numerous restrictions has been that a woman's ability to exercise her constitutional rights is dependent on the Country in which she lives.
It is the purpose of this Act to protect women's wellness by ensuring that abortion services volition go along to be available and that abortion providers are not singled out for medically unwarranted restrictions

Opponents reasons for voting NAY: (National Review, July 17, 2014): During hearings on S. 1696, Senators heard many myths from abortion proponents nearly the "need" for the bill's evisceration of all life-affirming legislation.

Myth: Life-affirming laws are enacted "under the false pretext of health and safety."
Fact: Induced abortion is associated with significant risks and potential harms to women.
Myth: "Where abortion services are restricted and unavailable, abortions still occur and are mostly dangerous."
Fact: Where abortion is restricted, maternal bloodshed rates have decreased.
Myth: Admitting privileges laws are "not medically justified."
Fact: Women with abortion complications are told to go to an emergency department. This would constitute malpractice in whatsoever other scenario.
Myth: Ultrasounds and their descriptions are "fell and inhumane."
Fact: Allowing women the opportunity to view their ultrasounds serves an important office in providing informed consent, enabling women to practice truthful pick.

Source: Women'southward Health Protection Act 15_S217 on Jan 21, 2015

Keep federal funding for family planning clinics.

Cantwell signed keeping federal funding for family planning clinics

Excerpts from Letter to the Senate Bulk Leader from 46 Senators: The contempo vote in the House to overturn rules protecting Title X health centers would deny women admission to intendance. In 2015, Title Ten provided basic master and preventive health care services such as pap tests, breast exams, and HIV testing to more than four million depression-income women and men at over iv,000 wellness centers. In big part due to this work, the Usa unintended pregnancy rate is at a 30-twelvemonth depression, and rates of teenage pregnancy are the lowest in our nation's history. The success of the program is dependent on funding. Family planning services, like those provided at Planned Parenthood and other family unit planning centers, should be available to all women, no matter where they live or how much coin they make.

Opposing argument: (Heritage Foundation, "Disentangling the Data"): Planned Parenthood received approximately $60 meg of taxpayer money nether Title 10, and $390 million through Medicaid. To ensure that taxpayers are not forced to subsidize America's number one abortion provider, Congress should make Planned Parenthood affiliates ineligible to receive either Medicaid reimbursements or Title X grants if they continue to perform abortions. Taxpayer money from these programs should instead be redirected to the more than than 9,000 federally qualified wellness center sites that provide comprehensive chief health care for those in need without entanglement in abortion.

Supporting argument: (ACLU, "Urging Championship 10"): Championship X services help women & men to programme the number and timing of their pregnancies, thereby helping to prevent approximately one million unintended pregnancies, nearly half of which would end in abortion. All the same, current funding is inadequate. Had Title X funding kept upwards with aggrandizement it would at present be funded at nearly $700 million. Nosotros ask that Championship X exist funded at $375 one thousand thousand, which is $92 meg above its current funding level.

Source: Alphabetic character to the Senate Majority Leader from 46 Senators 17LTR-TITX on Mar ane, 2017

CC:Publicly fund abortions.

Cantwell supports the CC survey question on funding abortion

The Christian Coalition Voter Guide inferred whether candidates concur or disagree with the statement, 'Public Funding of Abortions (Such as Govt. Health Benefits and Planned Parenthood)' Christian Coalition's self-description: "Christian Voter Guide is a clearing-house for traditional, pro-family voter guides. We do not create voter guides, nor practice we interview or endorse candidates."

Source: Christian Coalition Surve 18CC-1b on Jul ane, 2018

CC:No parental notification for abortions by minors.

Cantwell opposes the CC survey question on parental notification

The Christian Coalition Voter Guide inferred whether candidates agree or disagree with the statement, 'Parental Notification for Abortions by Minors ' Christian Coalition'southward self-clarification: "Christian Voter Guide is a clearing-house for traditional, pro-family unit voter guides. We exercise not create voter guides, nor exercise we interview or endorse candidates."

Source: Christian Coalition Surve 18CC-1c on Jul 1, 2018

Born-Alive Survivors bill tries to illegalize abortion.

Cantwell voted NAY Built-in-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act

Southward.311/H.R.962: Built-in-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Human action: Congress finds the following:

If an abortion results in the live birth of an infant, the baby is a legal person for all purposes under the laws of the United States, and entitled to all the protections of such laws.
(2) Whatsoever infant born alive later an ballgame or within a hospital, clinic, or other facility has the same merits to the protection of the police force that would ascend for any newborn, or for whatever person who comes to a hospital, clinic, or other facility for screening and treatment or otherwise becomes a patient inside its care.
In the case of an attempted abortion that results in a child born live, any health care practitioner present at the time the child is built-in alive shall exercise the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and wellness of the child as a reasonably diligent and conscientious health care practitioner would render to any other kid born live at the same gestational age.

Opposing argument from Rewire.com, "Built-in Live Propaganda," by Calla Hales, 4/12/2019 : From restrictive bans at various points of pregnancy to a proposed death sentence for seeking care, both federal and state legislators are taking aim at abortion rights. The goal? To brand ballgame illegal, criminalizing patients and providers in the procedure. One kind of bill making a recent resurgence is the "Born-Live Abortion Survivors Protection Deed." These bills aim to farther the false narrative that abortions regularly occur immediately earlier or, according to the president, at the fourth dimension of nascence. Intentional action to finish the life of an baby is already illegal. This is covered by federal and state infanticide laws. These bills do cipher but vilify physicians who provide reproductive wellness intendance.

Legislative outcome Referred to Committee in House; Senate movement to keep rejected, 56-41-3 (60 required).

Source: Congressional vote 19-S0311 on February 5, 2019

Protect the reproductive rights of women.

Cantwell co-sponsored protecting the reproductive rights of women

Provides that a State may not restrict the right of a woman to cull to terminate a pregnancy:
earlier fetal viability; or
at whatsoever fourth dimension, if such termination is necessary to protect the life or health of the adult female.
Allows a State to impose requirements medically necessary to protect the life or health of such women.
Declares that this Act shall not be construed to prevent a State from:
requiring minors to involve responsible adults earlier terminating a pregnancy; and

protecting individuals from having to participate in abortions to which they are conscientiously opposed. Source: Freedom of Option Act (H.R.25) 1993-H25 on Jan v, 1993

Ensure admission to and funding for contraception.

Cantwell co-sponsored ensuring admission to and funding for contraception

A bill to expand access to preventive health care services that help reduce unintended pregnancy, reduce abortions, and better access to women's health care. The Congress finds as follows:

Healthy People 2010 sets forth a reduction of unintended pregnancies as an important health objective to achieve over the first decade of the new century.
Although the CDC included family planning in its published list of the 10 Great Public Health Achievements in the 20th Century, the United states of america still has one of the highest rates of unintended pregnancies amongst industrialized nations.
Each yr, three,000,000 pregnancies, about one-half of all pregnancies, in the US are unintended, and nearly half of unintended pregnancies end in abortion.
In 2004, 34,400,000 women, half of all women of reproductive age, were in need of contraceptive services, and about half of those were in demand of public support for such care.
The United states has the highest rate of infection with sexually transmitted diseases of whatsoever industrialized land. 19 million cases impose a tremendous economic brunt, as loftier as $14 billion per year.
Increasing access to family unit planning services will improve women'due south health and reduce the rates of unintended pregnancy, abortion, and infection with sexually transmitted diseases. Contraceptive use saves public health dollars. For every dollar spent to increment funding for family planning programs, $3.eighty is saved.
Contraception is bones wellness care that improves the health of women and children by enabling women to programme and space births.
Women experiencing unintended pregnancy are at greater adventure for physical abuse and women having closely spaced births are at greater risk of maternal death.
A child built-in from an unintended pregnancy is at greater gamble of low nascence weight, dying in the first yr of life, beingness abused, and not receiving sufficient resources for healthy evolution.

Source: Prevention First Human action (S.21/H.R.819) 2007-HR819 on Feb 5, 2007

Focus on preventing pregnancy, plus emergency contraception.

Cantwell signed Prevention Beginning Act

Family Planning Services Act: Authorizes appropriations for family planning services grants and contracts under the Public Health Service Act (PHSA).
Equity in Prescription Insurance and Contraceptive Coverage Act: Amends the Employee Retirement Income Security Deed of 1974 (ERISA) and PHSA to prohibit a group health plan from excluding or restricting benefits for prescription contraceptive drugs, devices, and outpatient services
Emergency Contraception Education Act: to develop and disseminate data on emergency contraception to the public and to health intendance providers.
Compassionate Aid for Rape Emergencies Act: Requires hospitals, as a condition of receiving federal funds, to offer and to provide, upon request, emergency contraception to victims of sexual assault.
At-Risk Communities Teen Pregnancy Prevention Deed: to laurels grants for teenage pregnancy prevention programs & prevention inquiry.
Truth in Contraception Act: Requires that any information concerning the apply of a contraceptive provided through specified federally funded education programs be medically accurate and include wellness benefits and failure rates.
Unintended Pregnancy Reduction Act: to expand Medicaid's coverage of family unit planning services.
Responsible Education About Life Act: to make grants to states for family life education, including education on abstinence and contraception, to foreclose teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.
Prevention Through Affordable Access Act: Expands Medicaid rebates to manufacturers for the sale of covered outpatient drugs at nominal prices to include sales to student wellness intendance facilities and entities offer family unit planning services.

Source: S.21&H.R.463 2009-S21 on Jan 6, 2009

Click here for definitions & background information on Abortion. Click here for a Wikipedia profile of Maria Cantwell. Click here for a Ballotpedia profile of Maria Cantwell. Click here for SenateMatch quiz answers past Maria Cantwell. Click here for a summary of Maria Cantwell's positions on all problems. Click here for issue positions of other WA politicians. Click here for issue statements from WA primary archives. Click here for effect statements from WA secondary archives.
*Other candidates on Abortion:*		*Maria Cantwell on other issues:*
*WA Gubernatorial:* Bill Bryant Jay Inslee Loren Culp Phil Fortunato *WA Senatorial:* Chris Vance Dave Strider Jennifer Ferguson Mike Luke Patty Murray Susan Hutchison WA politicians WA Archives	*Senate races 2021-22:* AK: Incumbent Lisa Murkowski(R) vs.Challenger Kelly Tshibaka(R) vs.2020 candidate Al Gross(D) AL: Incumbent Richard Shelby(R) vs.U.Due south. Rep. Mo Brooks(R) vs.Administrator Lynda Blanchard(R) vs.Katie Britt(R) vs.Judge Jessica Taylor(R) vs.Brandaun Dean(D) vs.~~State Rep. John Merrill~~(R) AR: Incumbent John Boozman(R) vs.Candidate Dan Whitfield(D) vs.Jake Bequette(R) AZ: Incumbent Mark Kelly(D) vs.CEO Jim Lamon(R) vs.Blake Masters(R) vs.A.G. Mark Brnovich(R) vs.Mick McGuire(R) CA: Incumbent Alex Padilla(D) vs.2018 Senate candidate James Bradley(R) vs.Lily Zhou(R) vs.Country Rep. Jerome Horton(D) CO: Incumbent Michael Bennet(D) vs.Eli Bremer(R) vs.~~USAF Lt. Darryl Glenn~~(R) CT: Incumbent Richard Blumenthal(D) vs.Challenger Joe Visconti(R) vs.2018 & 2020 House candidate John Flynn(R) FL: Incumbent Marco Rubio(R) vs.UsRep. Val Demings(D) vs.U.Southward. Rep. Alan Grayson(D) GA: Incumbent Raphael Warnock(D) vs.Navy vet Latham Saddler(R) vs.Gary Black(R) vs.Herschel Walker(R) HI: Incumbent Brian Schatz(D) vs.Former Land Rep. Cam Cavasso(R ?) IA: Incumbent Chuck Grassley(R) vs.State Sen. Jim Carlin(R) vs.Michael Franken(D) vs.Bob Krause(D) vs.Former U.S. Rep IA-1 Abby Finkenauer(D) ID: Incumbent Mike Crapo(R) vs.James Vandermaas(D) vs.Natalie Fleming(R) IL: Incumbent Tammy Duckworth(D) vs.U.s.Rep. Adam Kinzinger(? R) vs.Peggy Hubbard(R) IN: Incumbent Todd Immature(R) vs.Challenger Haneefah Abdul-Khaaliq(D) vs.Psychologist Valerie McCray(D) vs.Thomas McDermott(D) KS: Incumbent Jerry Moran(R) vs.Michael Soetaert(D) vs.Mark Kingdom of the netherlands(D) vs.Joan Farr(R) KY: Incumbent Rand Paul(R) vs.Country Rep Charles Booker(D) LA: Incumbent John Kennedy(R) vs.Luke Mixon(D) vs.Gary Chambers(D)	MD: Incumbent Chris Van Hollen(D) vs.Colin Byrd(D) MO: Incumbent Roy Blunt(R) vs.Eric Greitens(R) vs.Scott Sifton(D) vs.Eric Schmitt(R) vs.Lucas Kunce(D) vs.Marking McClosky(R) vs.Vicky Hartzler(R) vs.Tim Shepard(D) vs.Billy Long(R) NC: Incumbent Richard Burr(R,retiring) ~~Erica Smith~~(D) vs.Marker Walker(R) vs.Ted Budd(R) vs.Pat McCrory(R) vs.Cheri Beasley(D) vs.Rett Newton(D) vs.~~Jeff Jackson~~(D) vs.Marjorie K. Eastman(R) ND: Incumbent John Hoeven(R) vs.Michael J. Steele(D) NH: Incumbent Maggie Hassan(D) vs.Don Bolduc(R) vs.Chris Sununu(R ?) NV: Incumbent Catherine Cortez Masto(D) vs.Adam Laxalt(R) NY: Incumbent Chuck Schumer(D) vs.Antoine Tucker(R) OH: Incumbent Rob Portman(R,retiring) Bernie Moreno(R) vs.Tim Ryan(D) vs.Jane Timken(R) vs.Josh Mandel(R) vs.JD Vance(R) vs.Mike Gibbons(R) vs.Morgan Harper(D) vs.Matt Dolan(R) OK: Incumbent James Lankford(R) vs.Nathan Dahm(R) vs.Joan Farr(R) OR: Incumbent Ron Wyden(D) vs.QAnon adherent Jo Rae Perkins(R) vs.Jason Beebe(R) PA: Incumbent Pat Toomey(R,retiring) vs.Everett Stern(R) vs.Jeff Bartos(R) vs.Val Arkoosh(D) vs.Carla Sands(R) vs.John Fetterman(D) vs.Malcolm Kenyatta(D) vs.Kathy Barnette(R) vs.Sharif Street(D) vs.Conor Lamb(D) vs.Sean Parnell(R) vs.Craig Snyder(R) vs.Mehmet Oz(R) SC: Incumbent Tim Scott(R) vs.Land Rep. Krystle Matthews(D) SD: Incumbent John Thune(R) vs.State Rep. Billie Sutton(? D) UT: Incumbent Mike Lee(R) vs.Allen Glines(D) vs.Austin Searle(D) vs.Evan McMullin(I) VT: Incumbent Patrick Leahy(D) vs.Scott Milne(? R) vs.Peter Welch(D) WA: Incumbent Patty Murray(D) vs.Challenger Tiffany Smiley(R) WI: Incumbent Ron Johnson(R) vs.Tom Nelson(D) vs.Sarah Godlewski(D) vs.Alex Lasry(D) vs.Chris Larson(D) vs.Mandela Barnes(D)	Abortion Upkeep/Economy Civil Rights Corporations Criminal offence Drugs Education Energy/Oil Environment Families Foreign Policy Free Trade Govt. Reform Gun Control Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Jobs Principles Social Security Tax Reform Engineering science State of war/Peace Welfare Other Senators Senate Votes (analysis) Bill Sponsorships Affiliations Policy Reports Group Ratings
Contact info: Fax Number: 202-228-0514 Mailing Accost: Senate Office SD-511, Washington, DC 20510 Phone number: (202) 224-3441

Page last updated: Dec 27, 2021

humeyoursteptat.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.ontheissues.org/social/Maria_Cantwell_Abortion.htm