TOP NEWS / COMMENTARY (June 29, 2009)

The latest news on Obamacare

GOP Refuses to Pop the Question

In what one New York Times writer called a "cuddly welcome," Tom Daschle returned to his old Senate stomping grounds yesterday for his first of two confirmation hearings. Few would have guessed by Thursday's warm reception that this was the same man who suffered an embarrassing exit from Congress as Senate Minority Leader in 2004. As Bob Dole, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and other Republicans lavished praise on the next Secretary of Health and Human Services, the hearing seemed more like a group hug than a cross-examination of a key Cabinet member. The fault, in large part, rests with Senate Republicans who failed to ask Daschle some significant questions. As one of the few groups to encourage members to ask tough questions, FRC was disappointed to see the lack of real scrutiny.

This hearing would have been a prime opportunity to ask Daschle whether he supports using taxpayer money to fund abortions for the first time in over three decades. Two years ago, Barack Obama said that "reproductive health care" (read: abortion) is an essential medical service. He went so far as to say that private and public insurers must pay for abortions or face consequences. Does Daschle agree? As a senator, Daschle vocally supported parental involvement laws in relation to abortion. If Obama forces health care plans to include abortion, would Daschle insist on laws that protect the rights of parents? Would he agree that the federal government should protect health care providers who don't want to be associated with abortion? These hearings are not simple formalities; this is a constitutional role that the Senate plays in shaping the policies of an incoming administration. Similar hearings will be held on President Obama's judicial nominees.

Will Republicans work to expose the left-leaning agenda of these nominees or will they simply play along to get along?

Giving Til It Hurts

It's been a full two months since voters banned same-sex "marriage" in California, but there seems to be no end in sight to the violence leveled at Prop 8 supporters. Gay and lesbian groups continue to target churches and businesses that donated to the marriage movement. This ongoing persecution is the subject of a new lawsuit by ProtectMarriage.com and the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF). To keep its supporters safe, the groups have banded to challenge California's campaign finance laws, which compel the state to publicize the names of those who contribute more than $100 to a political campaign. ADF argues that the Political Reform Act violates the right to privacy and subjects voters to "acts of vengeance." At the very least, attorneys believe the state should abolish the post-election reporting requirement, which makes the information available to the public even after the last ballot has been cast. There is some precedent for protecting donors. Back in 1982 the U.S. Supreme Court sided with the Socialist Workers Party, which asked to withhold contributors' names because of past harassment. FRC will be closely monitoring the suit and will update you as the case unfolds.

RESOURCES: Family Research Council