The Democratic Candidates

Regarding abortion. Kristen G:

https://youtu.be/R5bzyyW6uJ0

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mickeyrat said:

since agnes wont fuck you maybe you should do that yourself.

Do you think personal attacks against me, irrelevant to this topic - not to talk about the words you choose to use - really is warranted and/or fair?

oh thats just being witty or sarcastic. thought you established that was ok?

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mickeyrat said:

Spiritual_Chaos said:

mickeyrat said:

since agnes wont fuck you maybe you should do that yourself.

Do you think personal attacks against me, irrelevant to this topic - not to talk about the words you choose to use - really is warranted and/or fair?

oh thats just being witty or sarcastic. thought you established that was ok?

If one is witty or sarcastic. 

You were not. And it was not your intent.

You wanted to and choose to use a personal attack against me. Which obviously sheds some light on you.

Halifax2TheMax said:

If only the pro-life side had a sense of humour.

To them that would be like saying "if only the people being blown up on Alderaan had a sense of humour"

(I don't think they consider it a jokey matter)

mickeyrat said:

topic...

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/04/us/politics/joe-biden-climate-plan.html

A Reuters report last month said Mr. Biden was seeking a “middle ground” to combat climate change, which his campaign called a mischaracterization of his position. But that reporting appeared to prompt Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who is also running for president, and Ms. Ocasio-Cortez to make oblique swipes at Mr. Biden.

Over the weekend, speaking to a crowd at the California Democratic Party’s convention, Mr. Sanders seized on the phrase “no middle ground,” applying it to a spate of progressive priorities, remarks that were widely seen as a rebuke of Mr. Biden.

“We have got to make it clear that when the future of the planet is at stake, there is no middle ground,” he said.

There ain't gonna be any middle any more.

By Matt Stevens

    May 28, 2019

Senator Kamala Harris of California unveiled a plan on Tuesday that would require states and localities with a history of unconstitutionally restricting abortion rights to obtain federal approval before such laws can take effect.

Ms. Harris, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for president, called for what is known as a “preclearance requirement” in the plan, released as numerous states have passed laws to sharply limit abortions.

“When we look at a law like what’s happening in Alabama and they’re saying they’re going to sentence a doctor to 99 years, as a prosecutor, let me tell you, I got a real problem with that,” Ms. Harris said on MSNBC on Tuesday night, referring to an Alabama law intended to ban most abortions in the state.

“We cannot tolerate a perspective that is about going backward and not understanding women have agency, women have value, women have authority to make decisions about their own lives and their own bodies,” she said.

The requirement would apply to jurisdictions with a history of violating Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in 1973 that established the constitutional right to abortion. These jurisdictions would have to clear new abortion laws with the Justice Department before putting them into effect.

Ms. Harris is one of several Democrats in the 2020 race who have sharply criticized laws passed in Alabama, Missouri and other states that severely restrict abortion. She is also one of several Senate co-sponsors of the Women’s Health Protection Act, which would prevent any government entity from imposing various restrictions on abortion services.

Though some Democratic presidential candidates have already called on Congress to codify abortion rights, Ms. Harris’s campaign said her proposal went further by shifting the burden to states with a history of flouting Roe; the campaign cited South Carolina, Iowa and Georgia as examples.

“Are we going to go back to the days of back-alley abortions? Women died before we had Roe v. Wade in place,” Ms. Harris said on MSNBC, during a televised town-hall event. “On this issue, I’m kind of done.”

The preclearance requirement would work much like the one included in the Voting Rights Act, which was first passed in 1965 to combat voter discrimination. From 1965 to 2013, that law blocked hundreds of discriminatory laws and practices from going into effect.

In 2013, the Supreme Court effectively struck down the heart of the Voting Rights Act, ruling the formula that determined which states had to receive preclearance before making changes to voting procedures was unconstitutional.

Ms. Harris noted Tuesday night she would need 60 votes in the Senate to establish her proposed preclearance requirement and called on voters to pay attention to Senate races.

The Harris campaign said any change to abortion laws in a covered jurisdiction would remain legally unenforceable until the Justice Department determined that it adhered to the standards laid out in Roe and by the Women’s Health Protection Act, which remains stalled in the Republican-controlled Senate.

Ms. Harris’s campaign also said a number of guardrails would be put in place to protect the preclearance requirement regardless of a particular administration’s view of abortion.

“With reproductive freedom under attack nationwide, we’re heartened to see Senator Kamala Harris rolling out a bold plan to defend our fundamental rights,” said Sasha Bruce, senior vice president at NARAL Pro-Choice America, an advocacy organization.

“Every candidate in this field should know it’s not enough to simply call yourself pro-choice,” Ms. Bruce said. “All candidates need to back up their words with a concrete plan for action, especially given the tenuous thread by which reproductive freedom hangs.”

Astead W. Herndon contributed reporting.
A version of this article appears in print on May 29, 2019, on Page A12 of the New York edition with the headline: In Harris Plan, Abortion Laws Would Require U.S. Approval. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe