Thursday, March 31, 2005
Pence makes a stop in Bluffton
The Truth about Terri's Law
Clutching a cherished teddy bear to her side, a severely brain damaged woman died of starvation in Florida last week by court order and, as the whole world knows, that woman was Terri Schiavo.
After reading through a mountain range of letters and emails regarding the recent issues emanating from this heart wrenching case, I was struck by two qualities of the correspondence: passion and misunderstanding.
As a Member of Congress who strongly supported the Incapacitated Persons Act and the compromise legislation dealing only with Mrs. Schiavo’s case, I thought it would be in order to address both the passion and misunderstanding that have enveloped this debate.
The passion which this case has engendered speaks well of the heart of this great nation. People in America care about the weak and vulnerable. People in America care about the sanctity of life and the sanctity of marriage. And people care about the necessary limits on the power of the federal government ordained in the Constitution. It was inspiring to read the principled passion that this case inspired on both sides of the issue.
But as pronounced as the passion of public reaction was, so too was the misunderstanding it generated. I believe many in the public misunderstood both the condition of Terri Schiavo and what the constitution provides in due process protection for every person in the United States.
Societies are judged by how they deal with their most vulnerable citizens.
To understand why Congress chose to act, it is of first importance that we understand the precise circumstance of Mrs. Schiavo’s condition.
Many advocates of the Florida court’s decision referred to her as having been in a “coma” and on “life support.” This misunderstanding can be forgiven since so many in the major media repeated these facts despite the inaccurate nature of these terms as descriptions of Mrs. Schiavo’s physical condition.
Terri Schiavo was not in a coma. Every day for 15 years, according to her parents, she was conscious and responsive. The degree to which she understood their affections we may never know but she was not in the unconscious state that we most associate with the term “coma.”
Terri Schiavo was not on life support. She merely had a tube in her stomach to assist her in obtaining food and water. Most Americans understand the difference between being on a mechanical devise that keeps one’s organs working and being provided basic food and water.
I believe that many Americans simply do not understand that this severely brain damaged person was both conscious and responsive and not on life support. Understood in the light of these facts, one may better understand why millions of Americans, the President and bipartisan majorities in the House and Senate chose to act. A disabled woman, who only required food and water to remain alive, was being starved to death.
No American citizen may be deprived of his or her constitutional right to life without due process of law.
In this case, every member of Terri’s immediate family believed that the Florida courts had not afforded their daughter her due process rights and earnestly sought the opportunity to appeal her case to the federal courts.
Many opponents of Congressional action argued that the national government should stay out of a matter that falls within the jurisdiction of the state courts. This is an expression of a commitment to limited government at the federal level as described in the 10th Amendment to the Constitution. It is a principle of government that should be respected but it is not without its exceptions.
We are all grateful that during the height of the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960’s that President Kennedy and the Congress did not believe that laws pertaining to minorities were exclusively a matter of state law. Then, as now, the President and Congress understood that their oath to support and uphold the Constitution applied to defending those rights for every American.
It was in this spirit that Congress enacted legislation. The issue before the Congress was “does the federal government have a role in ensuring the constitutional rights of every American, even those who live at the mercy of others, are respected and defended?”
Seen in this light, many of my constituents have expressed much greater sympathy with the desire of federal officials of both parties in Congress to take action.
But the action Congress took is also deeply misunderstood.
In almost every letter I received criticizing Congressional action, Hoosiers wrote that Congress was wrong to “intervene in this case” and that Congress was wrong to pass a bill to “have Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube reinserted.” One major newspaper in Indiana recently published a poll that used this exact language in gauging public support for Congressional action.
The only problem with this is that this is not what Congress passed or the President signed. Regardless of what you may have heard or read, Congress did not vote to overturn the Florida courts or otherwise “intervene in the case.” Congress acted, rightly, to give our federal courts the opportunity to review the case and while I disagree with the court’s final decision, under our system of government, I accept it without hesitation.
All Congress did for the family of Terri Schiavo was open the doors of the federal courts to hear an appeal of her case, to determine whether or not her constitutional right to due process of law was being protected. That’s it.
Congress merely sought to ensure that Terri Schiavo and her family would have the same right to appeal to the federal courts that Scott Peterson and Charles Manson had. Under the constitutional right known as habeas corpus, every inmate on death row in America has the right to appeal their state court conviction to the Supreme Court of the United States.
Our founders added this specific right to the Constitution because they understood that every American’s right to life must never be taken from them without ensuring their constitutional right to due process of law is protected.
Terri Schiavo’s Legacy
The passion and misunderstanding of this case will subside and most of us will go on with our daily lives but before we do, let’s patch the hole in our system of justice that became apparent in the final days of Terri Schiavo’s life.
Congress must now act on the unhappy lessons of this case and ensure that every disabled and incapacitated American will have access to our federal courts should their lives be placed in jeopardy by order of any court. By enacting the Incapacitated Persons Act, the same bill that Congress first adopted in response to the tragic events in Pinellas, Florida, we will make certain that those in our society who suffer from physical or mental disability will have their right to life defended in the highest court in the land.
There can be no greater tribute to the memory of this fragile woman and her dedicated family. As the number of American seniors doubles in the coming years, and the likelihood of more tragic circumstances facing more families increases, the law must be changed to better address the needs of every American in such circumstance. The legacy of Terri Schiavo must be greater protections for disabled Americans.
Rep. Mike Pence
6th Congressional District of Indiana
Pence in Portland
Congressman Pence held a town hall meeting yesterday in Portland, Ind. You can read more about it from Newslink Indiana.
Thursday, March 24, 2005
Weekend Read: The job behind the job
Joe Rominiecki of Scripps Howard wrote a pretty cool (bipartisan) piece on what Members of Congress did for a living before they were, well, Members of Congress.
Wednesday, March 23, 2005
Human Events on "Medicare mess"
Human Events really lays it on the line in this story on the "Medicare mess." Congressman Pence is mentioned...
Tuesday, March 22, 2005
Washington Post profiles Pence
Click here to read the Pence profile piece running on the Washington Post's Federal Page today.
Sunday, March 20, 2005
NY Times quotes Pence on Schiavo case
Congressman Pence is quoted in the Sunday NY Times (subscription required) today on the Terry Schiavo case. Congress is convening this afternoon to try and pass a bill that will, in effect, keep Schiavo on her feeding tube.
Friday, March 18, 2005
Indianapolis Star endorses Pence's stand on enforcing the budget
Click here to read today's editorial.
Thursday, March 17, 2005
RSC and House leaders agree to budget enforcement tool
Members of the conservative House Republican Study Committee reached an agreement with the House leadership yesterday to implement a provision that will help enforce the spending limits set by the budget. You can read more about it in today's edition of The Hill.
Monday, March 14, 2005
Muncie Star Press: Delaware County sees return on gasoline taxes
Click here to read Rick Yencer's story on the Highway Bill that passed in the House last week.
Saturday, March 12, 2005
Thoughts from the frontlines of battle of the budget 2005
This week, House conservatives will fight to change the way we spend the people’s money in the “People’s House” as a debate over reforming the budget process comes to the floor of Congress.
Instead of willingly being party to the annual charade where Congress passes a tightfisted budget and repeatedly ignores it as excessive spending bills are passed, a courageous group of legislators have banded together to insist that the majority have the power to enforce the budget of the majority on the floor of the House.
Not that our leadership couldn’t see this coming. House conservatives have tried again and again to bring these reforms with legislation on the floor and within the confines of the Republican caucus.
Last year, House conservatives brought the Family Budget Protection Act, authored by Rep. Paul Ryan(R-WI) and Rep. Jeb Hensarling(R-TX), to the floor of the Congress. It included a broad range of changes designed to make our federal budget more reflective of the discipline practiced by every successful family budget at every kitchen table in America.
Chief among the concepts advanced in this legislation was the simple notion that the federal budget should not grow at a more rapid rate than the family budget. Reformers also introduced the idea that members of the majority in Congress should have the power to enforce the budget of the majority.
Under the present Rules of Congress, if a spending bill exceeds the budget, any objection can be waived by the members of the Rules Committee. Under the Family Budget Protection Act, any objection on the House floor raised against bills with excessive spending could only be waived by a supermajority vote.
The Family Budget Protection Act was defeated on the floor of the House when even a majority of Republicans opposed these commonsense measures.
Since then, House conservatives have brought these reforms forward in the form of amendments to the various rules that govern the Republican caucus and the House of Representatives itself. Time after time, House conservatives saw these measures opposed by members of our own party in Congress.
Now comes the debate over adopting the federal budget and House conservatives have determined to make a stand for fiscal discipline and budget reform.
But that stand has not been without a thoughtful effort to accommodate the concerns of our peers.
Instead of over a dozen reform measures, House conservatives have asked for one reform known as point of order protection, the power to enforce the budget.
Instead of requiring that such objections to excessive spending only be overcome by a supermajority, we have agreed to accept a simple majority vote.
Instead of requiring that these objections apply to all bills before Congress, House conservatives have agreed to only require such protection apply to spending bills that come before the House, perhaps as few as ten bills this year.
And so we begin our week with determination and hope. We are determined to stand for the kind of reform that will start us back down the road toward the fiscal discipline that the Republican Party has made its hallmark for a century and a half. We are hopeful that our conservative majority and our conservative leaders will see the wisdom of accepting this modest but important change in the way we spend the precious resources of the American people. Stay tuned.
Rep. Mike Pence
Columbus, Indiana
March 12, 2005
Friday, March 11, 2005
Highway Bill passes in the House
Read about the proposed funding for Sixth Congressional District projects in today's Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, Indianapolis Star and Richmond Palladium-Item.
Tuesday, March 08, 2005
Pence co-sponsors bill to ease regulation on small businesses
Monday, March 07, 2005
Indiana State Senator Hits Blogosphere!
Indiana State Senator David Ford is blazing new trails in the legislature. To our knowledge, the Republican from Hartford City (which is in the Sixth Congressional District) is the first and only member of the Indiana General Assembly to have his own blog. As regular readers of the Pence blog know, this is a great way to maintain communication with constituents and is the cutting edge of technology.
Way to go Senator Ford!
David Frum's Diary
National Review Online's David Frum has an analysis of the Washington Post piece by Hanna Rosin that ran on the front page of the Style section yesterday and talked about the involvement of evangelical Christians on Capitol Hill.
Washington Post: Christians have found a home on Capitol Hill
Click here to read the story.
President Bush takes his Social Security message on the road
You can read more about it in Time Magazine and today's USA Today.
Saturday, March 05, 2005
Pence '0 for 3' on Air Force One
Friday, March 04, 2005
Social Security reform update
Click here to read the story in today's Washington Times outlining where the effort to reform Social Security stands.
Wednesday, March 02, 2005
Morning read: Social Security reform update
Amy Fagan reports in today's Washington Times that the pace of Social Security reform will depend on the American people.
'Houses of Worship Free Speech Restoration Act' gaining momentum
Tuesday, March 01, 2005
Pence visits Greenbriar Elementary School in Anderson
Read more about his stop by clicking here.
|
 |
|
|
Archives
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
December 2007
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
July 2008
|
