Schakowsky, Dold Help Defeat Pro-Life Bill

North Shore representatives vote against bill that would criminalize abortion based on gender.

A proposed federal law criminalizing abortions performed solely because of the gender of the fetus was defeated Thursday as , joined six other Republicans in voting against the measure.

, voted against the bill as well, joining 160 of her Democratic colleagues to defeat the proposed legislation on procedural grounds.

The final vote was 246-168 in favor of the bill, which required a two-thirds majority because its sponsors were trying to rush it through and needed a suspension of the rules to do so, according to Dold communications director Stefani Zimmerman.

Schakowsky was incensed that the Republican majority would try to suspend its rules for a vote on this bill because they claimed it fights gender discrimination.

“If you ask American women where gender discrimination affects them most, they will say in their paychecks,” Schakowsky said. “Today Republicans brought to the floor a bill that addresses a nonexistent problem in the United States.”

Addressing the issue of gender discrimination, Dold split with his party because he does not want to insert the United States government into the relationship between a doctor and patient.

“Abortions based on gender-selection are reprehensible, but federal legislative intervention and criminalization is not the proper approach,” Dold said. “These are serious issues, particularly in some foreign countries, but today’s legislation would obligate American doctors to police and report thought crimes.”

Deerfield management consultant Brad Schneider, Dold’s opponent in the Nov. 6 general election, had no disagreement with Dold or Schakowsky. He was angry with the right wing influence within the Republican Party.

“The fact that this bill even came up for a vote shows that Tea Party Republicans are more concerned about pushing an ideological agenda than getting our economy moving,” Schneider said.

Schakowsky explained that if the bill became law, just the suggestion of a gender issue in an abortion could force an unwanted pregnancy on a woman.

“A woman’s husband or parents by merely alleging that an abortion is because of gender (could) seek injunctive relief to prevent the doctor from performing abortion procedures, sending an incredibly private, personal decision into the courts,” Schakowsky said.

Brian L. July 09, 2012 at 10:51 PM
How can you make a broad based statement about uneducated voters being democratic? Your argument against her saying conservatives aren't intelligent is just saying that democrats aren't intelligent, but you yourself are. Uneducated is such a broad term anyway. If we took a poll through the vast farmlands of our Midwest, we would find many many republicans who didn't finish school and are thus considered uneducated much in the same way you are implying inner city residents are uneducated. The Right also loves to preach on the free lunch idea. Yes, we (the left)like to help others. The nation would be great if we could count on everyone to donate time and money of their own accord on a grand scale. That doesn't happen. I'm not rich...I don't even own my own home, but I am doing better then a lot of unfortunate souls here in America. If some of my tax money can go towards helping them, I'm ok with that. Yes, there is abuse of those systems by both constituents and politicians and that should be fixed, but that doesn't mean those programs don't help people get on their feet again.
RB July 09, 2012 at 11:10 PM
Warren, are you describing a fiscal conservative, a social conservative, both or Republicans? If you think the Republican party of today is a fiscal small Government conservative party, I've got news for you. Small minded ideology has gotten in the way of small Government. Republicans today want individual freedom as long as they are the individual. They want Big Government when it comes to social ideology enforcement and Small Government when it comes to anything that benefits regular people, (especially now - when so many people need the safety net) or regulations to prevent another mortgage and economic meltdown like Bush 43 oversaw.
McCloud July 09, 2012 at 11:58 PM
Especially now when so many people need a safety net? Perhaps we all need a safety need from Obama, Reid, Pelosi and Shumer. After 4 years the clear evidence with each GDP and job index realease, Obama is a failure, and people need jobs not safety nets. The anemic economy has not improved under your dear leader, time for change to give all of us hope.
John C Thomson August 15, 2012 at 01:36 AM
All I know is that when it came down to killing the unborn or saving a women from cancer, Komen got kicked to the curb.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »