In 2007 and 2008, Obama didn't vote or voted present, on four of the top five bills and amendments on abortion and on women. Top bills and amendments were selected by Project Vote Smart.
For voting present or not voting on four of the top four bills and amendments in 2007, Obama received a 100% positive rating in 2007 from NARAL Pro-choice America.
Here are Mr. Obama's votes:
Date: 09/06/2007 Bill Title: Prohibiting U.S. Assistance for Groups that Support Coercive Abortion
S Amdt 2707 Vote: NV Outcome: Amendment Adopted - Senate
(48 - 45)
Date: 10/18/2007 Bill Title: Prohibiting Funds for Groups that Perform Abortions
S Amdt 3330 Vote: NV Outcome: Amendment Rejected - Senate
(41 - 52)
Date: 12/18/2007 Bill Title: Inclusion of Consolidated Appropriations
HR 2764 Vote: NV Outcome: Concurrence Vote Passed - Senate
(76 - 17)
Date: 02/26/2008 Bill Title: Prohibiting the Funds in S 1200 from Being Used for Abortions
S Amdt 3896 Vote: NV Outcome: Amendment Adopted - Senate
(52 - 42)
Date: 04/23/2008 Bill Title: Equal Pay Bill
HR 2831 Vote: Y Outcome: Cloture Not Invoked - Senate
(56 - 42)
One of these amendments, S 1200: Health Care for Indigenous Peoples, S Amdt 3896: Prohibiting the Funds in S 1200 from Being Used for Abortions, was co-sponsored by Mr. McCain. It is to prevent monies for Indian public health funding to be used to fund abortion--except in cases of rape, incest or the health of the mother. Mr. Obama didn't vote or voted present on S Amdt 3896. He doesn't support the current law, Doe's definition, of the health of the mother. "Senator Obama believes that ...'mental distress' should not be covered by a health exception," said Nick Shapiro, Obama spokesman (although he notes "a pregnancy may seriously damage a woman's mental health and those cases should be covered,"), reported by CBS News, July 9, 2008.
- Truth Partisan's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Front page
Comments
Clinton Has The Identical Voting Record
Clinton has the same voting record.
Abortion
Obama: http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category...
Clinton: http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category...
Women's Issues:
Obama: http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category...
Clinton: http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category...
McCain for reference: http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category...
That's not true if you go to the pages and look at them
Obama:
Clinton:
Now, I'm not an expert in abortion politics; and no doubt one could make the argument that substantively their voting records are the same.
But that's not the argument that A_B made; What A_B said was: "Clinton has the same voting record." That's not true.
Smarter trolls, please!
[ ] Very tepidly voting for Obama [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
And your point was--?
I'm sorry, I don't understand what your point was about the above.
Could you clarify?
I'd just like to point out
That Clinton's record is not relevant. The time is over when the Obama Fedayeen can use Clinton as an excuse. (I know they'll try, it's our job to call them on it when they do.)
Obama Wasn't Yet A Senator For Those Earlier Votes of Clintons
On the votes noted by Truth Partisan, their votes are identical. And the reasons they both have a No Vote is because they were both running in the Democratic Primary. And Lambert, before you say, well, that only goes to show how lacking in experience he is, that was not the point of the original post. We all know that Hillary is in her second term as a Senator, and Obama is aiming to be president before he's completed his first.
Cenobite, yours is a rather odd argument. It makes perfect sense to evaluate Obama's record on certain issues by comparing it to other liberal/progressive Democrats, especially in a post which seems to suggest liberal/progressive readers of this bog should be dissatisfied with Obama's on these issue. Hillary is a prime choice because many of the people who are commenting on Obama these days, preferred her over Obama.
It strikes me that the original post was poorly conceived and executed.
As much as I admire Truth Partisan's innovative Sunday morning book review feature, and I am truly grateful for that, this post is one of a kind that is making Corrente a wearying read.
So de-front-page it, then
RL today means I can't do everything today. In fact, that's true each and every day.
[ ] Very tepidly voting for Obama [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
Sorry, "Clinton is just as bad"
Needs to be filed with the VRWC's "Clenis Maneuver" as a cop-out strategy. What Clinton did or did not do is not relevant to Obama's record. A_B clearly intended to invalidate criticism of Obama using Clinton's record -- Obama is a big boy, no excuses for his record, please.
I Prefer Not To Do That
Comments are corrective enough, I hope.
As for the wearying comment, I feel to have de-front-paged this small post would be to put much to much responsibility for my displeasure on Truth Partisan's shoulders.
Well, both email and the phone are available
as is the Submit button. If you want horserace coverage, I'll find it difficult to oblige personally.
UPDATE I mean, Jeebus, I'm looking at the sidebar, and I'm seeing progressive causes being forwarded on single payer, women's rights, and the mortgage crisis, a media critique of the blogosphere, and an interesting "thesis" by bringiton. Sorry that's wearisome.
[ ] Very tepidly voting for Obama [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
Talk to your Congress and your Candidates
I am sorry to have offended, which was not my intent in any way.
The point of it all: I believe that, whether you are for Obama, McCain (also mentioned in the post as anti-abortion), or Cynthia, etc., you need to know that people are actually NOT standing up for abortion rights and rights for women because they are not VOTING for these things. Candidates are also saying and repeating (July 9 for Obama) that abortion rights should be limited to less than the current law. They need to be called on it.
I thought we had the attitude that the McCain criticisms were being handled elsewhere and we were some of the ones, we few, we happy few, we band of brothers and sisters, were calling Obama on his mistakes.
I knew Obama wasn't perfect on abortion but I was shocked when I saw these votes (when I was researching something else) and spent hours reading the information. And about Clinton? For me, the reason her votes are old news would be that she's not a candidate. But she would be just as responsible. And I'd be open to an argument it's a problem as she's still a Senator, etc...
Doesn't knowing the facts and knowing the sources strengthen our arguments to Obama and his spokespeople when they are not directly responsive? Doesn't it make us better voting citizens when we can say what about Bill x and name it?