Critical Condition

Hydra Health Care

The president’s proposal to to revive and “build off of” the 2,000-plus-page Senate bill should be dubbed “Hydra Health Care,” because every time one of the many heads of this pro-abortion mega-bill gets lopped off, two more seem to grow back. 


The president’s decision not to include the Stupak amendment in his proposal means that the current abortion-funding scheme remains in the Senate bill. 


And here are just a couple of the many additional pro-life problems in the Senate bill that the president’s proposal leaves untouched: 


Health-Care Rights of Conscience: The Stupak codification of the Hyde/Weldon conscience protection provision is not included, meaning that pro-life health-care workers would not have the full protection of the law against discrimination or dismissal. 


School-Based Health Clinics and Abortion Referrals: The Senate bill says that abortions cannot be “performed” in school-based health clinics, but there is no language to prevent school clinics from referring for abortion or even helping minors make arrangements to go across state lines to avoid parental-involvement laws. 


For some reason, I keep hearing the voice of Ronald Reagan: “There you go again.”

– Dorinda C. Bordlee is vice president and senior counsel of Bioethics Defense Fund, and editor of

Most Popular

White House

Trump vs. the ‘Policy Community’

When it comes to Russia, I am with what Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman calls the American “policy community.” Vindman, of course, is one of the House Democrats’ star impeachment witnesses. His haughtiness in proclaiming the policy community and his membership in it grates, throughout his 340-page ... Read More
Law & the Courts

DACA’s Day in Court

When President Obama unilaterally changed immigration policy after repeatedly and correctly insisting that he lacked the constitutional power to do it, he said that congressional inaction had forced his hand. In the case of his first major unilateral move — “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals,” which ... Read More

A Preposterous Review

A   Georgetown University professor named Charles King has reviewed my new book The Case for Nationalism for Foreign Affairs, and his review is a train wreck. It is worth dwelling on, not only because the review contains most of the lines of attack against my book, but because it is extraordinarily shoddy and ... Read More