• Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Subscribe
  • RSS

GOP To Drop “Forcible Rape” Language From Abortion Bill

Both James Joyner and Dodd Harris have written about the controversy that has erupted over the wording of the bill House Republicans have introduced related to taxpayer funding for abortion. Wisely, the GOP has decided to avoid the battle that was likely to erupt from what in retrospect was a poor job of legislative drafting:

House Republicans plan to sidestep a charged debate over the distinction between “forcible rape” and “rape” by altering the language of a bill banning taxpayer subsidies for abortions.

The provision in question, written as an exemption from the ban for women who become pregnant as a result of “forcible rape,” touched off a firestorm of criticism from women’s groups, and it gained enough attention to become the subject of a satirical segment on Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.”

But a spokesman for the bill’s author, Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), says the modifier “forcible” will be dropped so that the exemption covers all forms of rape, as well as cases of incest and the endangerment of the life of the mother.

“The word forcible will be replaced with the original language from the Hyde Amendment,” Smith spokesman Jeff Sagnip told POLITICO, referring to the long-standing ban on direct use of taxpayer dollars for abortion services.

The fight over the definition of rape threatened to sabotage Republican efforts to highlight their push to end taxpayer subsidies for abortion, and the distinction between types of rape mystified some GOP aides.

That highlighted quote is interesting in that it suggests that Smith was intending to differentiate the definition of rape in the bill from the one in the Hyde Amendment, and to make it harder for poor women to obtain abortions.

Personally, I don’t have a dog in this fight. Abortion simply isn’t an issue I’m interested in discussing anymore because it’s clear that compromise among those on both sides simply isn’t possible, and you can’t have a political discussion when one side accuses the other of being a “baby killer.” My default position is that the government shouldn’t be involved in this decision at all, whether or not it’s right or wrong. When it comes to funding, I’m generally libertarian.

However, it seems pretty clear that Smith was trying to pull a fast one here.

Related Posts:

About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May, 2010 and also writes at Below The Beltway. Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Comments

  1. mantis says:

    Nice try, Republicans, but your attempt to sneak in a rape downgrade ain’t gonna work this time.

    There are other fights to win though, brave GOPers! For instance, your attempts to thwart the wishes of the voters of Missouri and pass new laws allowing you to torture puppies may succeed!

    Next up, legalizing punching little girls in the face!

    Only antisocial psychotics would associate themselves with the Republican Party these days. Sadly, our country has a lot of those.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. narciso says:

    The Journolist wins again, you take great dictation Doug, Long live Minitrue!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. michael reynolds says:

    So, summarizing: they stuck the language in, fought for it by claiming it meant nothing. And now they’re dropping it.

    Your GOP at work.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. […] is likely what the people who wrote the new law had in mind.  The ambiguity has caused them to rewrite the law, omitting the “forcible” qualifier. FILED UNDER: Crime, Dodd Harris, Gender Issues, Quick […]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. Gustopher says:

    I don’t think this was a “poor job of legislative drafting”, I think it meant exactly what they intended it to mean.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  6. george says:

    This was always a bone for their most radical supports, which they had no intention on having pass – even most Republicans draw the line at banning abortion for rape.

    In fact, most of the Republican leaders have taken the same approach to abortion – speak out against it to pro-lifers, change the topic when speaking to the pro-choicers, and never get around to it when in a position to pass legislation.

    Not unlike the way the Democratic leaders treat their followers when it comes to real public health care.

    Don’t know why, I’m in a real cynical mood today. Must be the weather.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. anjin-san says:

    > In fact, most of the Republican leaders have taken the same approach to abortion – speak out against it to pro-lifers, change the topic when speaking to the pro-choicers, and never get around to it when in a position to pass legislation.

    Its certainly what Reagan did. Of course today’s GOP does not venerate Reagan, the man, who was a pragmatic politician who was pretty skilled at working with the other side. Just some caricature of him that they have invented.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  8. […] GOP To Drop “Forcible Rape” Language From Abortion Bill (outsidethebeltway.com) […]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  9. […] Funding for Abortion Act”. In the original draft of the bill, even the exception for rape was replaced with a narrower exception for “forcible rape”: suggesting that the Republicans intended victims of date-rape, or other forms of rape which […]

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0