AP: 6588ec2a-983c-4cbe-b827-dd4a44a77488
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., center, gestures during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, Feb. 8, 2011, to discuss women's health. From left are, Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., Gillibrand, Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn. and Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. (AP Photo/Harry Hamburg)

Murray on new abortion bill: We are not going back in history

BY Ursula Reutin  on February 8, 2011 @ 12:34 pm (Updated: 1:30 pm - 3/28/11 )

Related
By URSUA REUTIN
KIRO Radio

Washington Senator Patty Murray is among the Democrats already lining up to stop a Republican bill that would permanently cut off federal funding for abortions, even when the woman's life is in danger.

"Not on our watch, not in the Senate," Murray said in a statement against the bill.

The bill is called the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortions Act," and Murray says it's a move in the wrong direction.

"We're not going to stand by and watch while reproductive rights are threatened and women's health is jeopardized again in this country. We are not going back in history."

Currently, some federally funded health care programs will cover abortions in the case of rape and incest, or when the life of a woman is threatened.

Ursula Reutin, KIRO Radio Reporter
Ursula Reutin is the news anchor for The Dori Monson Show and has worked nearly every position in the KIRO Radio newsroom since her arrival in 1988.
Related:
More Local News
Top Stories
MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (21)


  • Add A Comment

  • daveismenotyou wrote...
    It isn't outlawing abortions for God's sake
    February 8, 2011 1:09 pm
    It is cutting federal funding for them. Why should the feds be responsible for paying for them?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Steve Dallas wrote...
    I'm pro choice....
    February 8, 2011 1:44 pm
    However I have to agree that Federal funding for something many people oppose for religious and moral reasons is wrong. Even state funding for this shouldn't be done.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • jpetro wrote...
    Dave is
    February 8, 2011 1:51 pm
    right, I vote for him.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • jkp28 wrote...
    Making this far too political
    February 8, 2011 2:04 pm
    Planned Parenthood gets $350 million/year of tax-funding. With the existing scandel of providing tips and unabashed abortion care to teens victims of sex trafficking, is simply appalling. Why are we not talking about cutting or putting funding on hold for them? Their leaders should be under a Federal hearing and system wide investigation, for the sheer fact that this happened in at least two states. I shutter to think of HOW wide spread it is, given that up to 300,000 underage sexual slaves exist in this country and no doubt have multiple unplanned pregnancies. Where is our commitment to caring for our girls and women? I am a Women's Health provider and take care of women in SEVERAL venues. The majority of Americans, REGARDLESS OF THEIR STANCE ON ABORTION, OPPOSE Federal funding of abortions. Why dump more taxes on the rest of us to pay for abortions? The reality is that abortions are rarely absolutely necessary. Certainly, if pregnancies are result of incest or rape, or TRUE hazard to a woman's health (this reasoning is often VERY stretched). These politicians are just revving up people, getting them emotional over Women's health is far more than "rights" to have an abortion. We need to be asking ourselves about safe Obstetric care, access to affordable contraception, access to all resources and alternatives so women can make truly informed decisions. Many abortion clinics I've seen have given patients the run-around and don't want to deal with complications or comprehensive f/u care. They are wanting their $700+ a procedure--which is a SURGICAL procedure NOT WITHOUT risks.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Loud Larry wrote...
    I think like - thinklikeme
    February 8, 2011 2:18 pm
    The "Headache" addendum! Seriously, create a fund and those who wish to do so could contribute to paying for the abortions of those in “need”. Doctors are also free to perform abortions pro-bono are they not?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • SeattleNative wrote...
    It would be interesting...
    February 8, 2011 2:23 pm
    ...to see the House play against the Senate on this issue.

    Catchy bill title.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • HPD 5-0 wrote...
    I wish
    February 8, 2011 3:18 pm
    Patty Murray's mom had aborted her.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • W900A wrote...
    Somewhat misleading too
    February 8, 2011 4:11 pm
    They always toss in the whole life of the mother business. Babies and Mothers can both be saved in all but the most rare cases. Also rape / incest? In those cases a judge would be involved and someone would be up on charges but why kill the baby? It has done nothing wrong. An abortion isn't going to make the mother somehow feel better, just adds to the sorrow in the end. If she doesn't want it or can't care for it, my family and many others would gladly adopt and raise the baby. People have to resort to going overseas now for adoptions because there aren't enough healthy adoptable babies here. Females don't want to be inconvenienced by the consequences of their choices so they throw it away. It is tragic and people have plenty of options for prevention in the first place it is the bad choices of both irresponsible men and women. Men don't get away without guilt here either. Part of the reason we have both an illegal alien problem and a shortfall of money for social security is a large chunk of the last 2 generations weren't allowed to be born in the first place. Choices have consequences and the US public shouldn't have to pay for your personal lack of morals, female or male.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • It's me! Ha ha! wrote...
    You want to pay for abortion?
    February 8, 2011 4:13 pm
    You can send a check or money order to a fund to murder unborn children.

    Cut off taxpayer funding of abortions in this contry and abroad.

    I don't want the blood of others irresponcibiliy on my hands.

    We MUST get these Godless Liberals out of power.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • tlmbrt wrote...
    I have news for you, Patty
    February 8, 2011 4:13 pm
    The MAJORITY in this country are NOT Pro-abortion-on-demand as you are. The bill would not outlaw abortions, just end the practice of forcing taxpayers to subsidize them. Just another form of SOCIAL WELFARE that lefties like you just LOVE.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }