Tag Archives: House

Nebraska legislature introduces bill to ban abortion after 20 weeks

Article from the American Thinker. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

Nebraska has a nonpartisan, unicameral legislature, so many of the shenanigans which can cause legislative bills to fall into a maelstrom of confusion are absent there. This is not a “partisan” issue, and no conference committee reports can swallow the bill and then regurgitate it as unrecognizable vomit.

Moreover, Legislative Bill 1103 will get a hearing: Its sponsor is Mike Flood, Speaker of Nebraska’s legislature.

Note that Mike Flood is a Republican. Republicans are pro-life.

More:

The Nebraska bill carefully accounts for those sorts of concerns that all decent people have always had about abortion: Might the mother die if the child is born? Could a live birth cause permanent damage to the mother’s health? (Legislative Bill 1103, though, makes a point of requiring physical and not “psychic” harm to the mother.) Amendments may include those other tricky areas — children born of rape or incest.

[…]The Nebraska bill will put fans of unrestricted abortion right where they belong — supporting all sorts of evil, as long as it is committed out of sight.

It’s a brilliant move. It’s a wonder that the pro-life movement hasn’t adopted a more incremental approach before, because it works. Make the Democrats publicly defend infanticide as a woman’s right to choose.

I hope you’ve all practiced your pro-life arguments. If not, then just read this, and you’re good to go.

If you know about pro-life arguments already, then why not try guessing who is more pro-life: men or women? Those links go to charts from the latest Gallup poll. Isn’t it surprising? I’m surprised.

Canada’s finance minister proposes changes to mortgage lending laws

From the National Post.

Excerpt:

On Tuesday, the Department of Finance announced three changes to the standards governing government-backed mortgages, that come into force April 19. Here are a summary of the changes.

QUALIFYING FOR A FIVE-YEAR RATE

The adjustments to the mortgage framework will require mortgage insurers to ensure that new borrowers qualify for a five-year fixed rate mortgage when calculating the gross debt service and total debt service ratios. The measure is intended to protect Canadians by providing them with additional flexibility to support mortgage payments at higher interest rates in the future.

LIMIT THE MAXIMUM REFINANCING

Borrowers seeking financial flexibility can currently refinance their mortgage and increase the amount they are borrowing on the security of their home up to a limit of 95% of the value of the property. The adjustment will lower the maximum amount of the mortgage loan in a refinancing of a government-backed high-ratio mortgage loan to 90% of the value of the property, consistent with the principle that home ownership is a tool for savings.

DISCOURAGING SPECULATION

This measure will require a minimum down payment of 20% for government-backed mortgage insurance on non-owner-occupied properties purchased for speculation. At present, borrowers may purchase a residential property with a 5% down payment. The change will require a 20% down payment for small non-owner-occupied residential rental properties. Borrowers purchasing owner-occupied residential properties which also include some rental units (such as a duplex) will still be able to access government-backed mortgage insurance with a 5% down payment.

But the CEI reports that the Democrat mortgage bailouts encourage fiscal irresponsibility.

Excerpt:

Economists and real estate experts are saying that a $75 billion mortgage bailout program designed by the Obama administration has backfired and harmed the housing market…

[…]Earlier, the government pushed through billions more in other mortgage bailouts, to bail out even reckless high-income borrowers, and forced financial institutions the government took over in the name of fiscal responsibility, like Freddie Mac, to run up billions in losses bailing out irresponsible borrowers.

Banks will now be pressured to make even more risky loans. The House has approved Obama’s proposal to create the so-called Consumer Financial Protection Agency. Government pressure on banks to make loans in economically-depressed neighborhoods was a key reason for the mortgage meltdown and the financial crisis. Yet Obama’s disturbing proposal would empower the new agency to enforce the Community Reinvestment Act without regard for banks’ financial safety and soundness.  The Community Reinvestment Act was a key contributor to the financial crisis.

The mortgage crisis was also caused by the reckless government-sponsored mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and by federal affordable-housing mandates. But Obama’s proposed financial rules overhaul does absolutely nothing about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, admits Obama’s Treasury Secretary, tax cheat Timothy Geithner, even though he admits that “Fannie and Freddie were a core part of what went wrong in our system.”

Worse, the Obama Administration lifted the $400 billion limit on bailouts for Fannie and Freddie, so that they could continue to buy up junky mortgages at taxpayer expense, and showered their executives with $42 million in compensation.

Obama’s financial-regulation plan is “largely the product of extensive conversations” with two lawmakers responsible for the corrupt status quo, Chris Dodd and Barney Frank, and it expands the reach of regulations that have been used by left-wing groups to extort pay-offs from banks.

This is why we should have elected an economist like Stephen Harper.

Former midwife reveals sorry state of NHS maternity services

Story here in the UK Daily Mail. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

I started working as a midwife in Basildon in 1995. I left to work as an independent midwife in January last year because I simply could not bear to let any more women down.

During a typical 12-hour shift, I could be the sole midwife in charge of six women in the antenatal ward  –  some in early labour  –  or one of two qualified midwives running a postnatal ward with up to 32 women.

If I was in the delivery unit, I would assist in the births of up to three babies a shift.

Obviously, if there was a crisis during a woman’s labour  –  such as a sudden need for an emergency Caesarean  –  there was always a surgical team on call, and there would be an anaesthetist available to administer epidurals and so on.

But in terms of the normal care through labour, that was all down to the midwives.

Although we were under huge stress even back in 1995, current cutbacks mean fewer and fewer midwives are caring for more and more women.

No wonder new mothers are encouraged to leave hospital just hours after giving birth.

When I started in the mid-Nineties, there were 35,000 midwives working in Britain. A year or two ago, that number had fallen to 25,000, more than half of whom were part-time.

What a mess! Here is my previous story about 4000 NHS patients denied hospital beds to give birth to children.

More NHS horror stories linked here.

Health care podcasts from the libertarian Cato Institute

I listened to these and thought they were filled with interesting details about the effects of Obamacare.

Now may be a good time to call your representatives in Washington and tell them not to pass the health care reform bill.