MP's want to wafle and kill the next generation.

MPs call for abortion law reforms
Merely because people have a social agenda and try to portray it as science means nothing. Science can not indicate morality. I guess these MP's would legislate that if the baby survived an abortion than it was perfectly acceptable to do Scientific Research on the child. No matter what they say the reason for the laws is because no one is certain of the facts of the life of the child in the governement and they are trying to cover their backsides.
But it is a child!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no reason why women seeking an abortion should need the approval of two doctors, a group of MPs has said.

A report by the Commons science and technology committee found the requirement did not serve a useful purpose and might be causing delays.

MPs also rejected calls to lower the 24-week legal limit for an abortion in England, Wales and Scotland.

They said although survival rates for babies born at 24 weeks had improved, they had not done so below that point.

Not all members of the cross-party committee agreed with the report's findings, however.


We have focused on the science, and have done so rigorously
Phil Willis, committee chairman

Conservative MPs Nadine Dorries and Bob Spink published their own separate report, claiming they had been misled on survival rates and also on the question of whether foetuses could feel pain.

The main report also called for more involvement by nurses in early abortions.

Nurse role

It said nurses and midwives with suitable training and professional guidance should not be prevented from carrying out all stages of early medical abortions, which involves the use of drugs, and early surgical abortions.


HAVE YOUR SAY
One doctor alone should not be allowed to sign away a potentially viable human life
Nicky, London

Send us your comments

There was no evidence such a move would compromise patient safety or quality of care, the committee's report found.

It recommended just one doctor should have to sign a consent form, rather than the two currently required by the Abortion Act - a change proposed by the British Medical Association.

It went on to say there was also no evidence to suggest women, who chose to do so, should not take the second of two pills required for an early abortion at home.


The report should have reflected the differences of opinions which exist and allowed MPs to draw their own conclusions
Minority report submitted by MPs Nadine Dorries and Bob Spink

Committee chairman Phil Willis said: "Abortion is a complex issue. As a science and technology committee, we have focused on the science, and have done so rigorously.

"In our inquiry we have attempted to sift the evidence on scientific and medical developments since the last amendment of the law in 1990 and since the 1967 Act."

MPs 'misled'

He urged all MPs and the public to study the evidence and their conclusions.

The matter will now be debated in the House of Commons.

Pro-choice and anti-abortion MPs are expected to table amendments to the forthcoming Human Tissue and Embryos Bill in light of the committee's findings.


This pragmatic and sensible report provides a valuable reference point for anyone who is thinking seriously about how modern abortion care should be provided.
Ann Furedi
British Pregnancy Advisory Service

Conservative MPs Nadine Dorries and Bob Spink said MPs "have been misled in this report on two major issues: pain and survival. Two areas where experts strongly disagree and there is no clear consensus on either issue.

"The report should have reflected the differences of opinions which exist and allowed MPs to draw their own conclusions."

Labour MP Jim Dobbin, chairman of the all-party Pro-Life group, said the committee had "ignored key scientific developments" and criticised its failure to consider ethical, as well as scientific arguments as "deeply worrying".

"The imbalance of witnesses also skewed the outcome of the evidence presented," he said.

Still controversial

Marie Stopes International welcomed the committee's report as "a victory for science over thinly-veiled ideological hokum".

Ann Furedi, of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, a major provider of abortions, said: "This pragmatic and sensible report provides a valuable reference point for anyone who is thinking seriously about how modern abortion care should be provided."

But Michaela Aston, a spokeswoman for anti-abortion charity Life, was angry that MPs rejected lowering the 24 week limit.

She accused the committee of "following a predetermined ideological agenda that owes very little to a careful consideration of the facts".

BBC health correspondent Branwen Jeffreys says abortion remains intensely controversial after 40 years and the figures have continued to rise.

In 2006 there were almost 200,000 abortions in England and Wales with a further 13,000 in Scotland.

Our correspondent says the vast majority were early abortions - 89% were carried out before 13 weeks and just 2% after 20 weeks.

Almost all are permitted on the grounds that pregnancy would damage the physical or mental health of the woman. Only 1% of abortions are carried out on the grounds that the child would be born with a serious disability.

S.1 SEC. 220 - DISCLOSURE OF PAID EFFORTS TO STIMULATE GRASSROOTS LOBBYING

Call me a pessimist But I really wonder what the reason for wanting to control and have grassroots lobbying efforts register with the House and Senate?

I suspect that this will end up in court and be struck down as breaking the freedom of speech, but its a pretty good try. You have give the democrats credit. They must have been working on these for Years!!!!! the biggest problem that they have is that they wrote this before their were blogs and people getting out information on the Internet. Now while the big organizations are important they are less so and so the democrats have less of an impact.

SEC. 220. DISCLOSURE OF PAID EFFORTS TO STIMULATE GRASSROOTS LOBBYING.

(a) Definitions- Section 3 of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1602) is amended--

(1) in paragraph (7), by adding at the end of the following: `Lobbying activities include paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying, but do not include grassroots lobbying.'; and

(2) by adding at the end of the following:

`(17) GRASSROOTS LOBBYING- The term `grassroots lobbying' means the voluntary efforts of members of the general public to communicate their own views on an issue to Federal officials or to encourage other members of the general public to do the same.

`(18) PAID EFFORTS TO STIMULATE GRASSROOTS LOBBYING-

`(A) IN GENERAL- The term `paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying' means any paid attempt in support of lobbying contacts on behalf of a client to influence the general public or segments thereof to contact one or more covered legislative or executive branch officials (or Congress as a whole) to urge such officials (or Congress) to take specific action with respect to a matter described in section 3(8)(A), except that such term does not include any communications by an entity directed to its members, employees, officers, or shareholders.

`(B) PAID ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE GENERAL PUBLIC OR SEGMENTS THEREOF- The term `paid attempt to influence the general public or segments thereof' does not include an attempt to influence directed at less than 500 members of the general public.

`(C) REGISTRANT- For purposes of this paragraph, a person or entity is a member of a registrant if the person or entity--

`(i) pays dues or makes a contribution of more than a nominal amount to the entity;

`(ii) makes a contribution of more than a nominal amount of time to the entity;

`(iii) is entitled to participate in the governance of the entity;

`(iv) is 1 of a limited number of honorary or life members of the entity; or

`(v) is an employee, officer, director or member of the entity.

`(19) GRASSROOTS LOBBYING FIRM- The term `grassroots lobbying firm' means a person or entity that--

`(A) is retained by 1 or more clients to engage in paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying on behalf of such clients; and

`(B) receives income of, or spends or agrees to spend, an aggregate of $25,000 or more for such efforts in any quarterly period.'.

(b) Registration- Section 4(a) of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1603(a)) is amended--

(1) in the flush matter at the end of paragraph (3)(A), by adding at the end the following: `For purposes of clauses (i) and (ii), the term `lobbying activities' shall not include paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying.'; and

(2) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following:

`(4) FILING BY GRASSROOTS LOBBYING FIRMS- Not later than 45 days after a grassroots lobbying firm first is retained by a client to engage in paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying, such grassroots lobbying firm shall register with the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House of Representatives.'.

(c) Separate Itemization of Paid Efforts To Stimulate Grassroots Lobbying- Section 5(b) of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1604(b)) is amended--

(1) in paragraph (3), by--

(A) inserting after `total amount of all income' the following: `(including a separate good faith estimate of the total amount of income relating specifically to paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying and, within that amount, a good faith estimate of the total amount specifically relating to paid advertising)'; and

(B) inserting `or a grassroots lobbying firm' after `lobbying firm';

(2) in paragraph (4), by inserting after `total expenses' the following: `(including a good faith estimate of the total amount of expenses relating specifically to paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying and, within that total amount, a good faith estimate of the total amount specifically relating to paid advertising)'; and

(3) by adding at the end the following:

`Subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (2) shall not apply with respect to reports relating to paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying activities.'.

(d) Good Faith Estimates and De Minimis Rules for Paid Efforts To Stimulate Grassroots Lobbying-

(1) IN GENERAL- Section 5(c) of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1604(c)) is amended to read as follows:

`(c) Estimates of Income or Expenses- For purposes of this section, the following shall apply:

`(1) Estimates of income or expenses shall be made as follows:

`(A) Estimates of amounts in excess of $10,0000 shall be rounded to the nearest $20,000.

`(B) In the event income or expenses do not exceed $10,000, the registrant shall include a statement that income or expenses totaled less than $10,000 for the reporting period.

`(2) Estimates of income or expenses relating specifically to paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying shall be made as follows:

`(A) Estimates of amounts in excess of $25,000 shall be rounded to the nearest $20,000.

`(B) In the event income or expenses do not exceed $25,000, the registrant shall include a statement that income or expenses totaled less than $25,000 for the reporting period.'.

(2) TAX REPORTING- Section 15 of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1610) is amended--

(A) in subsection (a)--

(i) in paragraph (1), by striking `and' after the semicolon;

(ii) in paragraph (2), by striking the period and inserting `; and'; and

(iii) by adding at the end the following:

`(3) in lieu of using the definition of paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying in section 3(18), consider as paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying only those activities that are grassroots expenditures as defined in section 4911(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.'; and

(B) in subsection (b)--

(i) in paragraph (1), by striking `and' after the semicolon;

(ii) in paragraph (2), by striking the period and inserting `; and'; and

(iii) by adding at the end the following:

`(3) in lieu of using the definition of paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying in section 3(18), consider as paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying only those activities that are grassroots expenditures as defined in section 4911(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.