Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
03.23.2009 9:01 pm

UPDATE: Is abortion the top item in the Missouri GOP agenda?

St. Louis Post-Dispatch
  • Email this
  • Print this

UPDATE: The filibuster ended at 9:23 p.m. when Sen. Rob Mayer asked that his bill be laid over. A little more than 5 hours. Likely ends debate on the issue in the Senate this year.

JEFFERSON CITY — As the abortion coercion bill filibuster nears its 5th hour on the Missouri Senate floor (it’s 8:50 p.m. Monday night as I write this), a fair question must be asked:

Despite all the talk about jobs, is abortion actually the top issue on the minds of the Missouri Republican leadership this year in the General Assembly? That’s a point the Democrats filibustering the bill keep making, and at least in terms of total time spent debating on the House and Senate floor, the argument has some weight.

“We now have given almost twice as much time to this bill as we have the economic development bill,” said Senate Minority Leader, Sen. Victor Callahan, during the Democrats filibuster of the abortion coercion bill tonight.

The coercion bill never made it to the Senate floor last year, but Majority Floor Leader Sen. Kevin Engler promised anti-abortion groups that an abortion bill would be debated on the Senate floor this year.

Between this debate, and the debate on the bill in the House, and a further debate in the House on the anti-FOCA resolution, it appears that abortion is the No. 1 priority issue for the Republicans who control both chambers. That will play well with some members of the party’s base; not so well with others pushing for a jobs bill or other economic development legislation. Abortion sure wasn’t mentioned by Republican leaders as the session began as their top issue, but based on time for debate so far, one could argue it is.

What makes the debate particularly curious is that last year, such a bill had a chance to be signed by then Gov. Matt Blunt; but the bill likely has no chance to be signed by Gov. Jay Nixon.

So politically, the question becomes this: Does this gambit strengthen Engler’s leadership in the Senate by giving into the conservative wing of his party and allowing the debate, or does it anger Democrats and moderate Republicans to the point that this year’s Senate becomes Home of the Filibuster?

Discuss …

20 comments

Comments are closed.

The answer is YES. Sorry it took you five hours to figure it out.

— SallyD
9:21 pm March 23rd, 2009

I can’t vote for republicans because they can’t seem to keep their religion out of politics. I can’t vote for democrats cause they just raise my taxes and are general morons. I can’t vote for libertarians cause they can’t win….. Anybody down for a revolution where in the end we place a monkey in charge?

— larry
10:28 pm March 23rd, 2009

As long as the monkey’s photogenic, I’m all for it.

— Marco
10:36 pm March 23rd, 2009

This bill will be passed by both chambers, vetoed, and overridden in 2010.

— dkj
7:16 am March 24th, 2009

Mr. Messenger, you really need to call out the Democrats on this one. The reason so much time is being spent on this bill is because the Democrats are fillibustering.

— Think|
7:56 am March 24th, 2009

Should the protection of innocent life be a priority? It’s a pretty simple answer, isn’t it? Abortion kills over 1 million babies a year? It is the leading cause of premature death.

Any logical person’s default position should be that human life is good. Ending human life is bad. When human life is to be ended, then each politican and person for that matter should provide a good argument to why it is justified. Does the party-going chick who just wants to drink, screw, and avoid consequences really have such a good argument to end a life?

— Think|
8:00 am March 24th, 2009

larry,

This isn’t a religious issue. It is basic biology. Human life begins when an egg is fertilized. You learned that in Junior High. If you think the ability to end another person’s life is a libertarian issue, then I think you are a bit punch drunk.

— Think|
8:03 am March 24th, 2009

” Human life begins when an egg is fertilized. You learned that in Junior High.”

I don’t remember seeing this in any biology textbook–elementary thru college. Perhaps the parochial schools have a “special” edition.

— suzyjax
8:24 am March 24th, 2009

I like that column a couple of days ago, that says that anti-abortion does not necessarily logically imply pro-life. Generally, the religious right wants to forbid abortions. But these are also the same people (according to the apparent party platform) that don’t want to pay taxes for schools or help other people support their children, support the war (maybe life at 18 is less valuable?), and support the death penalty. Apparently, all life is sacred… unless it isn’t. To me, it’s offensive because it stinks of a control issue, rather than one of morality, because birth control doesn’t actually kill babies, but they don’t like that one either. A bunch of men who want to force women to live according to their rules.

— abc
9:13 am March 24th, 2009

The anti-abortion folks are an election too late. With Nixon in office and President Obama, they’re out of luck till 2012. The Republicans may be playing to a portion of their base, but they’re losing more votes than they’re gaining. It would seem part of politics is timing and picking winnable fights.

— Sailor
10:47 am March 24th, 2009

Pages: [1] 2 » Show All