When Obamacare was forced on the nation by former President Obama and the Democrats in control, Americans responded by handing Republicans the keys to Congress. The irony is that they could very well lose that same majority if they dont deliver on four election cycles of campaign promises. Late Thursday, the draft repeal plan, which had been holed up in leadership and committee meetings, was finally released to mixed reviews. At least four senators Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, and Ron Johnson put leaders on notice that they would need to see more changes before lending their support. Currently, for a variety of reasons, we are not ready to vote for this bill, but we are open to negotiation and obtaining more information before it is brought to the floor, the statement said.

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), whos adamant about voting before the July 4th holiday, has a week to get everyone on the same page, which President Trump is optimistic the GOP can do. Its not that [these four conservative senators are] opposed. Theyd like to get certain changes. And well see if we can take care of that, he promised. On Twitter, he was even more exuberant. I am very supportive of the Senate #HealthCareBill. Look forward to making it really special!

In many ways, The Wall Street Journal points out, the 142-page bill is a lot like the Houses American Health Care Act. The plan would end Obamacare penalties, cut taxes on higher earners, and revamp Medicaid. But in other ways, its not. It isnt clear if those changes, such as the shape of the tax credits and a more gradual phasing-out of the Medicaid expansion, would be enough to attract more centrist Republicans without alienating the most conservative lawmakers in both chambers.

As far as FRC is concerned, the plan isnt perfect but weve been working with the Senate and the White House to iron out the problems so that pro-lifers can support it, and we will continue to do so. Friday morning, in a meeting with the White House, HHS Secretary Tom Price, and other pro-lifers, we discussed our concerns in greater detail namely that the legislation fulfills the longstanding promise to protect taxpayers and the unborn.

In a joint statement with SBA List, we explained that the expectations of the pro-life movement have always been clear. The health care bill must not indefinitely subsidize abortion and must re-direct abortion giant Planned Parenthoods taxpayer funding to community health centers. The Senate discussion draft includes these pro-life priorities, but we remain very concerned that either of these priorities could be removed from the bill for procedural or political reasons. We are working closely with our pro-life allies in the Senate to prevent this from happening as it could result in our opposition. We are confident that the pro-life Senate will ultimately move forward with our pro-life priorities intact.

But the Senate needs to hear from you so that they are reminded they need to listen to us. Let your leaders know that you elected them not just to finish the job but to finish the forced partnership between taxpayers and the abortion industry!

Originally published here.

Its rare to get good news from the courts these days, but in Mississippi, Gov. Phil Bryant (R) got exactly that. Before the ink had even dried on his Protecting Freedom of Conscience from Government Discrimination Act, a group of liberal activists at the ACLU filed suit. In one of the more ironic parts of the case, the group went to court not over what had happened under the law but what might happen if Christians could opt out of ceremonies or jobs that violated their faith. That speculation was enough for a lower court judge, Carlton Reeves, to block the measure from taking effect.

Fortunately, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals doesnt base their judgements on speculation, but on facts. And Thursday, a panel unanimously overturned Reeves, arguing that the plaintiffs didnt even have the standing necessary to sue. Gov. Bryant, who was the picture of courage in passing the bill last year, felt vindicated. As I have said all along, the legislation is not meant to discriminate against anyone, but simply prevents government interference with the constitutional right to exercise sincerely-held religious beliefs.

Under H.B. 1523, no one is allowed to discriminate not against same-sex couples and not against Christians. All the law does is ensure that the government cant punish someone for their natural views on marriage or sexuality. Theres no fine print giving people the right to deny services, despite the Lefts bogus propaganda. If coexistence is the goal, then this law provides the path. Alliance Defending Freedoms Kevin Theriot agrees with us that Mississippians shouldnt have to live in fear of losing their careers or businesses simply for believing in natural marriage.

As Ryan Anderson explained, When the government takes Americans to war, exceptions cover pacifists. When the government guarantees abortion, exceptions cover pro-lifers. These exemptions dont amount to establishments of any religion, and neither do laws protecting dissenters after Obergefell.

Unlike other cases, which have been about the laws merits, this was about the groups standing. In order to sue, the ACLU needed to establish an injury, and all the activists could come up with was that they felt stigmatized and insulted because of the law. FRCs Travis Weber points out, Courts have been facing this type of tenuous, emotionally based allegation of injury more and more in recent years, and they only bog down the judicial system with claims that were never meant to be brought in the first place. When such claims are allowed to proceed, and a law is struck down, the effect is that one more area of our democratic process is chiseled off and placed into the hands of activists who would happily destroy the process if that meant they could achieve their aims.

Thanks to the Fifth Circuit, Mississippis law still stands. And, maybe just as importantly, liberals were held in check. Like the rest of America, these judges are probably tired of the Left trying to push agendas through the courts that they cant pass legislatively!

Originally published here.

America is under new management all right and the Trump administration isnt just making that clear at home. The United Nations got one of its first tastes of the change in U.S. policy during a debate over a Canadian resolution in Geneva earlier this week. As part of a push to eliminate violence against women, the UN tried to slip in language about the importance of access to health care (read: abortion). Women should have the benefit of comprehensive sexual and health-care services including modern contraception, prevention programs for adolescent pregnancy, and safe abortion where such services are permitted by national law.

Obviously, the American delegation is opposed to violence against anyone, including women. But, as Jason Mack, the U.S. First Secretary to the UN, told the body, We do not recognize abortion as a method of family planning, nor do we support abortion in our reproductive health assistance. That said, Mack went on, America strongly supports the spirit of this resolution and joins other members of this Council in condemning all acts of violence against women and girls.

Pro-lifers cheered the move, which comes on the heels of other major changes on the world stage. Just last month, the Trump administration announced that it wasnt just reinstating the Mexico City policy but redirecting billions of dollars of global aid to groups that dont perform or promote abortion. Our hats go off to the White House for exceeding everyones expectations on the issue and protecting millions of innocent children in the process!

Originally published here.

This is a publication of the Family Research Council. Mr. Perkins is president of FRC.

See the original post here:
The Anatomy of Health Care Deal - Patriot Post