Last week, Wisconsin Right to Life filed a challenge in the Eastern District Federal Court asking that the new Government Accountability Board regulation on free speech be declared unconstitutional. Club for Growth and One Wisconsin Now filed a separate and different challenge in the Western District Federal Court.
Now, six more organizations have appealed to the State Supreme Court to strike down the new regulation. And, yesterday, Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen issued a formal opinion on the impact of the Citizens United U.S. Supreme Court decision earlier this year in regulating speech.
The Van Hollen opinion is interesting. He states that “the reasoning and conclusion of Citizens United are clearly applicable and that any ban on corporate independent expenditures under Wisconsin law violates the guarantees of freedom of speech and association under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.” He also cautions that while Citizens United does not necessarily prohibit regulations, it does not “independently authorize regulatory action. Only state law may do so, and those laws must pass ‘exacting scrutiny’ to be constitutional.”
You may wonder, why the fuss? We thought McCain/Feingold was bad – and it was. McCain/Feingold prohibited speech only in broadcast ads. The GAB rule regulates all speech – print, broadcast, Internet, email, etc. As one of the groups pointed out, it may impact a farmer who wants to speak about issues by painting a sing on his barn.
This issue is about America and the freedom we enjoy as citizens and as citizens who gather together to petition the government to express our opinions. At least, until now.
Every fall, Congress passes numbers of authorization and appropriations bills to keep the government funded and running. Every year, we right-to-lifers are successful in prohibiting the use of federal taxpayer dollars for abortions by adding amendments to dozens of these bills. It has been fairly routine each year for taxpayer funding of abortions to be prohibited. NO MORE!
Buoyed by the success of the abortion-laden Obamacare and stung by the President’s regulation to prohibit abortion funding in high-risk insurance plans, pro-abortion groups and legislators are more determined than ever to force you, the taxpayer, to pay for abortions in every instance imaginable.
First on the list is funding abortions at military hospitals. Sen. Roland Burris (D-IL) successfully added an amendment to a defense authorization bill to allow abortion at taxpayer-funded military base hospitals. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) objected to unanimous consent to allow the bill to be considered. McCain’s objection forces the leadership to find 60 votes to consider the bill. And, so it will go on… bill after bill.
It is strange that legislators would actually vote in favor of taxpayer funding of abortions when polls over the past three decades indicate the American public does not want its taxpayer dollars used in this way. For those up for re-election, they do so at their own peril.
Wisconsin Right to Life and its state political action committee are challenging Wisconsin law.
The challenge, filed Aug. 5 in federal district court in Milwaukee, asserts that Wisconsin law, including two new Government Accountability Board regulations, unconstitutionally impose full-fledged political-committee burdens on entities such as Wisconsin Right to Life.
“The Supreme Court has held that regulating entities as political committees is not only burdensome but also onerous,” said James Bopp, Jr., lead counsel for the plaintiffs. “Almost 35 years ago, the Supreme Court established that government may impose such burdens only on entities that are under the control of, or have the major purpose of nominating or electing, candidates.”
Nevertheless, Wisconsin imposes such burdens on entities such as Wisconsin Right to Life.
“These requirements are so burdensome and onerous that they in effect are a ban on speech,” Bopp said.
“For too long, so-called campaign finance reform advocates have attempted to silence citizen groups. The net result, if they are successful, is that the only ones who will be allowed to speak and inform the public are candidates themselves and the media. This is unacceptable in a country built on a foundation of free speech,” Bopp said. “Wisconsin Right to Life has been at the forefront of protecting speech in America, winning a landmark case in the U.S. Supreme Court in 2007. This challenge is another step towards the goal of protecting First Amendment rights.”
On behalf of the Wisconsin Right to Life State Political Action Committee, the suit also challenges requirements that political committees disclose particular contributions and spending within 24 hours, a burdensome oath political committees must take saying their independent expenditures are independent, political-committee reporting thresholds, the limits on contributions to committees doing only independent expenditures, and particular attribution and disclaimer requirements.
“Some political-committee disclosure requirements are constitutional, but the disclosure requirements that the Wisconsin Right to Life State Political Action Committee challenges are not,” Bopp said. “In addition, limits on contributions to political committees doing only independent expenditures are unconstitutional.”
The culture of death has many facets. The latest twist? A Georgia man with Lou Gehrig’s disease wants to be killed for his organs. He believes his diagnosis is “a death sentence, positively, no questions asked.” In an act of what he believes to be magnanimous compassion, Garry Phebus wants other people to live by having his good organs transplanted into them, knowing that removal of his vital organs will cause his death.
Causing his death in this manner is, of course, not legal. So, Phebus has taken his appeal online to get backing from others. “I am not suicidal. I just know that it is a matter of time before I die and wish to do a good thing for those people who have a good life expectancy” he says in a youtube video.
A new “selling” point for the culture of death. A macabre one at that.
Despite concerns about the rapid growth and potential harmful effects of putting embryonic stem cells in human beings, the FDA and the Obama Administration have approved the first human trials using embryonic stem cells. Geron, a California cloning company, received approval for the human clinical trials well over a year ago but the trials were put on hold because of safety concerns encountered in animal studies. The approved early stage trial is for patients with spinal cord injury.
Dr. David Prentice says, “It’s unfortunate that the FDA has released Geron from the safety hold on their embryonic stem cell trial. Even many pro-embryonic stem cell scientists have expressed reservations about Geron’s trial, that it is not proven even in rats. The concern for many of us is that Geron is endangering patient’s health and very lives to make a political point and increase their stock price.”
Yesterday, I wrote about the success of adult stem cells in treating real patients with real diseases. The Geron story once again moves adult stem cells to the back of the bus.
It’s what good friend Dr. David Prentice has been telling us all along. Ethical adult stem cells are the only stem cells that are helping real people with real diseases. Now comes public confirmation in an August 2 Associated Press story.
“For all the emotional debate that began about a decade ago on allowing the use of embryonic stem cells, it’s adult stem cells that are in human testing today,” says the article. “Adult stem cells are being studied in people who suffer from multiple sclerosis, heart attacks and diabetes. Some early results suggest stem cells can help some patients avoid leg amputation.” The story talks about how early this research is and describes success stories with real patients.
If you watch the news cycle carefully, you will see stories that appear regularly about stem cell success in human patients. The key to understanding these stories is to know that ALL of these successes come from using ethical adult stem cells. Sometimes the stories make this distinction, and sometimes they falsely lead the reader to believe that unethical embryonic stem cells are lifting the load.
Dr. Prentice has done yeoman work to help the public understand that you don’t need to destroy living human embryos to successfully treat patients. It is great to see an independent news source substantiate Dr. Prentice’s findings.
The title of this article by Sarah Kliff published at POLITICO.com says it all. When National Right to Life blew the whistle on high-risk insurance plans funded by Obamacare money that paid for abortions, Kliff says “Abortion rights advocates were caught completely off-guard.”
The article quotes several mouthpieces from pro-abortion groups. “‘This is not the outcome we expected,’ said Laurie Rubiner, Planned Parenthood vice president for public policy. ‘We’re stuck in a slow back-pedal,’ said Laura MacCleery, government relations director for the Center for Reproductive Rights. There needs to be a sense that, while health reform moves us forward, it moves us backwards in terms of reproductive rights.’”
In the article the groups lament that with a supportive President and Congress, it is difficult to motivate their followers. Fundraising has dipped and they are having trouble getting people excited about the 2010 elections.
The biggest stab in the back: “All the reproductive health groups that POLITICO spoke with said they were not consulted on the decision to bar elective abortion coverage in the high-risk pools.” Abortion activists are frustrated. And, that’s just fine with us.
![[Email]](http://www.wrtl.org/blog/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/email.png)
![[Facebook]](http://www.wrtl.org/blog/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/facebook.png)
![[MySpace]](http://www.wrtl.org/blog/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/myspace.png)
![[Twitter]](http://www.wrtl.org/blog/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/twitter.png)
