CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg

30%↑

15%↑

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

50%↓

50%↑

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

35%↓

30%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
December 01, 2017 10:36 AM UTC

Tax Bill, like a Trump Initiative backed by CO Lawmaker, Advances Personhood Abortion Ban

  • 17 Comments
  • by: Jason Salzman

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

The Republican tax bill is being stuffed with provisions that go way beyond taxes, including language that for the first time recognizes fertilized eggs (zygotes) in federal law.

The bill allows parents to set up education accounts for an “unborn child” or “child in utero,” defined as “a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb.”

Coloradans will recognize the bill’s language as reflecting the wording of “personhood” abortion bans, which aimed to give legal rights to zygotes and thereby turning an abortion into a murder.

Personhood laws would also likely ban some forms of birth control, as courts have accepted arguments for anti-abortion activists that some contraception has the potential to destroy a zygote.

Personhood amendments were overwhelmingly defeated here in 2008, 2010, and 2014.

Despite the losses, the personhood concept has the support of some Colorado Republicans, like U.S. Sen. Cory Gardner, who co-sponsored federal personhood legislation when he was a member of the U.S. House and did not withdraw his support from the bill during his campaign for U.S. Senate in 2014.

Gardner has already backed the GOP tax bill in committee.

At the Colorado Capitol, Republicans introduced personhood bills in recent years, with the lead sponsors of this year’s bill being State Representatives Stephen Humphrey of Eaton and Kim Ransom of Lone Tree and State Sen. Tim Neville of Littleton.

What do personhood backers in Colorado think of Trump’s effort to enshrine personhood in federal law?

On his Facebook page, Colorado State Rep. Tim Leonard of Evergreen, a longtime personhood supporter and co-sponsor of the 2017 state personhood bill, recently lauded Trump for taking pro-personhood steps within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Trump’s HHS took what Snopes calls a “radical departure” from previous administrations, both Republican an Democratic, in including language in planning documents defining human life as “beginning at conception.”

Such a definition of a person comports the wording of Colorado’s personhood amendments and legislation, as well as the language of the Republican tax plan under consideration in the U.S. Senate.

“This changes the political (and monetary) landscape of HHS, and is a major needed change to turn toward of Culture of Life from Obama’s Culture of Death!,” wrote Leonard on Facebook.

“Donald Trump is turning out to be the most pro-life President we have had for a very long time. All because he uses common sense, puts Americans first, and could care less about the lukewarmness of political correctness,” added Leonard on Facebook.

A message left for Leonard to confirm his post and find out if he support the personhood language in the tax bill was not immediately returned.

Tweet
Share

Comments

17 thoughts on “Tax Bill, like a Trump Initiative backed by CO Lawmaker, Advances Personhood Abortion Ban”

  1. I'm surprised Doug Lamborn didn't offer an amendment to the bill to change the name of our species to the hetero sapiens before they voted on the zygote-goes-to-college amendment.

      1. The same way that Eggmendments I-IV would have done: by codifying a fetus as a "person" in to law for future courts to argue about.

        Of course, I can already incorporate a ham sandwich and give it a bunch of "personhood" rights under court precedent.

        1. ackno0ledgement of the nonexistant and hopping aside, then . . . 

          . . . that education account isn’t about doing anything to “protect life” is it?

          BTW you opening any education accounts for your spent kleenexes, Fluffy?  Preserve and protect . . .

      1. Have you seen Moddy arguing that Congress needs to re-authorize CHIP? No. And Sen. Hatch is now on record saying we really can't afford to re-authorize it unless we cut other things. (Conveniently, he supports adding $1 trillion plus to the debt of our nation through the tax "reform" bill.)

        1. According to what I read on Yahoo News this AM, the 529 for fetuses section got pulled out from the Senate bill. Big reason seems to be that parents can already set up a 529 when wife is pregnant; they just have to change the name later.

          1. Yes, but it's still in the House bill (where it originated), so it can easily be reinserted in the Conference committee's version.  I'd guess there is a 1000% chance that it will come back just like all the other zombie provisions the GOP is so fond of inserting in unrelated bills.

            The Senate GOP's proposed tax legislation does not include a provision allowing parents to start a college savings account for unborn children, breaking from the House bill.

            The provision to extend eligibility for tax-advantaged 529 college savings plans to unborn children has been praised by anti-abortion groups as strengthening the idea that life begins at conception.

            The House bill specifically defined an unborn child as a "child in utero" and further as "a member of the species homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."

            The Senate did not include such language in the initial version of its bill, which was unveiled Thursday. That could change though, as the Senate Finance Committee will begin marking up the bill next week. Senate leaders will likely hold a floor vote after Thanksgiving.

            1. Why stop at allowing zygotes, embryos and fetus (feti?) to get college funds which are tax deductible. I've never understood why the Republicans haven't granted personal exemptions for fertilized eggs.  

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

187 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!