An Indiana legislative committee has approved a proposal that would prohibit any state contracts or grants with Planned Parenthood
or other organizations that provide abortions.
The House Public Policy Committee voted 7-3 Thursday to send the bill to the full House.
Republican Rep. Matt Ubelhor of Bloomfield says he sponsored the bill because he wants to cut off about $1.6 million that
Planned Parenthood of Indiana receives from the state for medical services. Planned Parenthood, the state's largest abortion
provider, says that money is used for non-abortion services.
Republican Rep. Sean Eberhart of Shelbyville said he opposed abortion, but voted against the bill because it would withdraw
money from an organization that provides many health services to the disadvantaged.
Planned Parenthood officials say it provides thousands of women with pelvic exams and education about preventing unintended
pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases.
IBJNews
Panel OKs pulling Indiana Planned Parenthood money
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
on Facebook & Twitter
on Facebook & Twitter
 Follow IBJ's Tweets on these topics: |
||
| @IBJNews | @Propertylines | @IBJTheScore |
| @IBJArts | @IBJHealthcare | @IBJDining |
| @IBJLists | @IBJSmallbiz | |
-
something to take iman's mind off CART,,,the league itsownself doesn't do it
-
Someone mentioned a green roof. Every designer of a new urban building should be required to at least explore the feasibility of a green roof. The ability to cut carbon dioxide, save precious rainwater (drought this summer??) and re-use grey water, cool the building cheaper, and improve the view for neighbors, should be, not only the good neighbor thing to do, it should be the responsible neighbor thing to do. Too bad the city didn't require it when they gave up downtown green space for the Simon Building. Surprised they aren't requiring it now.
-
About the same means down, like the TV ratings.
My favorite tradition that needs to be brought back is the 25/8 rule. -
Your stats are incorrect. The 85k Government employees working in Marion County includes all government workers in Marion county. That is state, federal, non profit agencies, city and county. The stats the article list is the number of employees for all of the city/county employees and it is correct. That number includes the library, airport, convention center, and so on. The policy of extending benefits to domestic partners is consistent with private sector companies of the same size. Isn't the mantra of most conservatives "run the government like a business."
Also, too say the "fiscal proposil is huge" without considering the actuarial factors involved is a bit of an overstatement. We really don't know if it is huge or not. If all of the people added to the plan are healthy and don't have claims then it could bring cost done or hold them neutral. -
There are 85,346 government employees in Marion county according to Stats Indiana.
My understanding is that this proposal covers not only same sex partners and children, but opposite same sex partners who are not married and any kids.
It also covers all city and county employees, plus municipal corporations which use city/county benefits packages including Health and Hospital Corporation (Wishard), Indianapolis Airport Authority, Indianapolis Convention Center,Lucas Oil,Bankers Life, Indianapolis Marion County Library, and Indianapolis Public Transportation Corporation (IndyGo).
Certainly Indianapolis Public Schools will also want more benefits also.
The fiscal cost on this proposal is huge.
IBJ Featured Advertisers
ADVERTISEMENT
Back to TopCopyright © All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use.
Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing.
Additional Hosting & Delivery by
IBJ Conversations
28 Comments
Add Comment
The House Public Policy Committee voted 7-3 Thursday to send the bill to the full House.
End Abortion So Mote it, May it be So, Man is the Key to Heaven and to be its defender Woman is the lock and the gate we All Must Pass through H.R.881, Congressman Duncan D. Hunter, right to life at Conception Act.
If we have to Suit Obama Out an Senators the congressmen an Judges an doctors that back his Actions to support abortion, It is dereliction of duty to the Oath of office as the leadership of common defense, Use Direct criminal constitutional Contempt, Sanctum Mcgallium use the International Maritime Jurisdiction clauses.
The actions of leadership insights Murder ââ?¬Å?Abortionââ?¬Â? and causes death. These Laws and Views that was used to bring down the Judges and Abortion Supporting doctors with the Hitler movement at the end of World war two read the History of the Trails at Nuremberg Germany. File the pre tort Claim then Flood the Small Claims courts. Any money used to pay for a abortion is backed by the federal government they control the worth of money and printing, the oath of office is to protect life as country, the Doctors oath is 1st do no harm.
Note this Quote is not mine it belongs to a American Indian and I have forgot his name or where I found it ââ?¬Å?Great Men and Women like Great Nations are only as great as the Words they keepââ?¬Â?,
For this view I sight The Story of the White Buffalo Caf�© Woman and the respect Woman and Life. Thought in honor of Little fox & Little Two crows
Bruce Michael Anderson
on writing Dot Com
IF
When rape results in pregnancy, or when giving birth might cost the mother's life, few women would fail to consider as an alternative:
Abortion.
But let's say you're a doctor--a physician not morally adverse to terminating a patient's pregnancy--and the circumstances are neither frivolous nor dire.
Let's say that on a given day you are consulted by two young women, both pregnant, both doubtful as to whether they should be.
Now, remember: such a choice is ultimately the mother's, but because you are a physician, and because your judgment is respected, and because your patient is seeking guidance, everything you say, regardless of how clinically objective--yes, even the tone of your voice--may sway her decision.
Yours is a position of enormous responsibility. Like it or not, the very expression on your face could save or extinguish a life.
Your first expectant mother is Caterina.
Caterina is unmarried, obviously in her teens, obviously poor.
You ask her age, and she tells you, and at once you realize she has overstated her years by one or two or three.
Caterina is in the first trimester of her pregnancy.
You ask if she has been pregnant before.
Caterina shakes her head.
Studying her, you wonder.
You inquire of her general health; no problems, she says.
And the health of the father?
Caterina shrugs; her eyes fall.
She has lost contact with the father of her unborn child. All she knows is he was twenty-three, a lawyer or a notary or something like that. He lives nearby, she thinks; she is not sure. The affair was over quickly, little more than a one-night stand. No child was expected--nor now is wanted.
What Doctor, is your advice?
Later the same day, you are consulted by a second expectant mother.
Her name is Klara.
Klara is twenty-eight, married three years, the wife of a government worker; she has the look of a woman accustomed to anguish.
Concerned for the ultimate health of her unborn, Klara explains that for each year of her marriage she has had a child--and each has died; the first within thirty-one months, the second within sixteen months, the third within several days.
Disease? You ask.
Klara nods. She suspects that any future child would be equally susceptible. For you see, her husband is also her second cousin. Both Catholic, they received papal dispensation to marry--though now Klara questions their wisdom in asking permission.
And there's something else...
One of Klara's sisters is a hunchback; another sister, the mother of a hunchback.
Klara is in the first trimester of her fourth pregnancy. The odds are against the health of her child. Time is running out.
And it is only later that you learn--Klara's husband is not, as she has said, her second cousin. He is her uncle.
So what, Doctor, is your advice?
In addition to all immediate considerations--physical, moral, religious--the dilemma of whether to terminate a pregnancy is a philosophical question:
Might this life, if left to live, affect the consciousness or even the destiny of mankind?
Yet if the profundity of this question is diminished by the balance which governs all life, there is evidence in the two true stories you have just heard: the unwed mother with unwanted child; the married mother with the graves of three infants behind her.
For if you, as the hypothetical physician, have opted in both cases for abortion--then you have respectively denied the world the multifaceted genius of Leonardo da Vinci--and spared humanity the terror of Adolf Hitler.
They are THE REST OF THE STORY.
Kevin FFebruary 17, 2011 5:02 PM
you wanted republicans in control.....you got em!
This legislative session has quickly become a nightmare.
No immigrants
No gun restrictions
No public education
Poor people required to have babies (healthy or not)
Sadly, Indiana has lost its way and, along with wreaking havoc on public education, same-sex marriage and potentially discriminatory immigration laws, we're poised to set ourselves back in ways we can't begin to imagine.
Oh wait...