Regardless of one’s views on this sensitive topic, Mr. Boucher’s votes on abortion are extreme left. Mr. Boucher is one of the most passionately liberal pro-abortion advocates in Congress as witnessed by his 100% approval rating by Planned Parenthood (the number one abortion provider in the country) and pro-abortion NARAL (formerly National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League). He has a “zero” approval rating from National Right to Life.
There have been at least 47 votes in Congress on the abortion issue since 1988 and Mr. Boucher has voted 100% in favor of all pro-abortion issues and 100% AGAINST any restrictions whatsoever. He has voted for tax payers’ funding of abortions, PARTIAL-BIRTH ABORTIONS and even abortions performed by private organizations in foreign countries.
Mr. Boucher strongly supports Mr. Obama who said that he would, as one of his first actions as President, immediately sign the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) which, if passed, would abolish all restrictions on abortion. That Bill would make it mandatory for all hospitals to provide abortions upon request, including partial birth abortion, and taxpayers would foot the bill. FOCA is a sweeping Act that would abolish all pro-life regulations across the nation, from parental notification laws to bans on taxpayer funding of abortions. All categories of pro-life laws would be stampeded and nullified as FOCA would nail shut the coffin on any and all pro-life safeguards.
Mr. Boucher is a Congressional CO-SPONSOR of the FREEDOM OF CHOICE ACT (HR 1964) introduced in its current version in April, 2007.
There is an extremely informative and creative website at www.ffl9.com/ . It is highly recommended. That site (which stands for Fight for Life - 9th District) has been created by citizens of the 9th who are fighting to expose the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) and Mr. Boucher’s co-sponsorship of that Bill. (There is now a link to that website on our Home Page).
(It is widely known that Mr. Obama’s support for abortion is so extreme that he was the lone voice in favor of letting a LIVING fetus (baby) die unattended if it was born after a failed abortion attempt. His reasoning was that the “INTENT of the mother” took priority over the LIFE of the living “fetus”…. er, baby).
On the issues of abortion, Mr. Boucher continually claims that he, as our Representative in the 9th District, represents the “mainstream majority” of the citizens in Southwest Virginia. Based on his following key votes and summary, YOU BE THE JUDGE.
Some of Mr. Boucher’s key votes:
1. 1988 (HR4776) - PROHIBIT use of TAX PAYER money for abortions in D.C. Boucher voted NO. (i.e. Boucher voted FOR using tax payer money to pay for abortions in D.C.). Congress REJECTED it.
2. 1991 (HR2707) - “Gag Rule” Barring Abortion COUNSELING in Federally Funded Clinics. (This was a vote to override President George H. W. Bush’s veto). Boucher voted YES to barring COUNSELING. The veto override FAILED.
3. 1993 (Hyde Amendment) - To adopt an amendment that BANS USE of FEDERAL FUNDS for an Abortion UNLESS the pregnancy is a result of rape, incest or to save the life of woman. Boucher voted NO to the BAN on use of taxpayers’ money. (i.e Boucher continued to favor tax payers funding of abortions). Congress voted YES to the BAN by 256 to 171.
4. 1995 Foreign Abortion Ban Amendment. To prohibit FEDERAL FUNDS from being allocated to any PRIVATE ORGANIZATION that performs abortions in a foreign country except cases of rape, incest, or to save life of woman. Boucher voted NO. (i.e. Boucher favored taxpayers funding of abortions in foreign countries). Congress voted YES to BANNING use of taxpayer money to private organizations providing abortions abroad by 240 to 181.
5. 1995 - PARTIAL-BIRTH ABORTION BAN. Bill that would BAN partial-birth abortion. Defines PARTIAL-BIRTH ABORTION as an abortion in which partially vaginally delivers a living fetus before killing the fetus and completing the delivery. Boucher vote NO to the BAN on PARTIAL-BIRTH ABORTION. Congress voted YES the BAN 288 to 139. (Clinton vetoed it. Congress OVERRODE the veto).
6. 1996 - Medicaid Funded Abortions Amendment. A vote NOT TO ALLOW STATES to DECIDE whether to use Medicaid funds to pay for abortions in case of rape, incest, or to save life of the woman. It REQUIRES states to make Medicaid funds available. Boucher voted YES. Congress voted NO 222 to 198.
7. 1997 - Population Planning Bill. FORBIDDING funds to international groups that perform abortions. Boucher voted NO. (i.e. he voted FOR American tax payers’ money to be used). Congress voted NO to the use of tax payers’ money.
8. 1999 - Prohibition of Chemically Induced Abortion. Amendment to PROHIBIT Food and Drug Administration from testing, developing or approving any drug for the chemical inducement of Abortion. Boucher voted NO. (i.e. he voted NOT to prohibit FDA). Congress voted YES to prohibiting FDA.
9. 1999 - CHILD CUSTODY PROTECTION ACT. Bill that criminalizes transporting a MINOR across state lines to AVOID PARENTAL NOTIFICATION LAWS and obtain access to Abortion services. Boucher voted NO. Congress voted YES 270 to 159.
10. 2005 - CHILD INTERSTATE ABORTION NOTIFICATION ACT. PROHIBITS the transportation of a minor across state lines to obtain an abortion WITHOUT the CONSENT of a PARENT or LEGAL GUARDIAN. Boucher voted NO. (i.e. he voted in favor of the transport of a minor across state lines WITHOUT PARENTAL CONSENT). Congress voted YES to prohibiting it - 270 to 157.
11. 2006 - Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act. CRIMINALIZES the transportation of pregnant MINORS across state lines with the intention of the MINOR obtaining an abortion as a way to ESCAPE state laws requiring PARENTAL CONSENT. Boucher voted NO to criminalizing such an act. Congress voted YES 264 to 153.
12. 2006 - Abortion Pain Bill. (Also referred to as Unborn Child Awareness Bill). Outlines protocols that abortion providers must follow before performing an abortion on unborn child that is 20 or more weeks (5 months) into development. Required material to be presented to mother regarding possible pain to fetus. Boucher voted NO. The Bill failed.
Do you believe Mr. Boucher’s votes on this issue represent the “values” of the majority of folks in Southwest Virginia? Organizations like Planned Parenthood and pro-abortion NARAL vehemently agree with Mr. Boucher and give him a 100% approval rating. National Right to Life gives Mr. Boucher “zero” approval rating and National Christian Coalition gives him a 15% approval rating.
SUMMARY:
- Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines (Jan., 2007).
- Voted YES on allowing human embryonic stem cell research (May, 2005).
- Voted NO on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions (April, 2005).
- Voted NO on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime (Feb, 2004).
- Voted NO on banning partial-birth abortion except to save a mother’s life (Oct, 2003).
- Voted NO on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research (Frb, 2003).
- Voted NO on funding for health providers who don’t provide abortion info (Sep, 2002).
- voted NO on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad (May, 2001).
- Voted NO on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes (Apr, 2001).
- Voted NO on banning partial-birth abortions (Apr, 2000).
- Voted NO on barring transporting minors to get an abortion (Jun, 1999).
- Voted FOR ensuring access to and funding for contraception (Feb, 2007).
- Rated 100% by pro-abortion NARAL.
- Rated 100% by pro-abortion Planned Parenthood.
- Rated 0% by National Right to Life.
YOU BE THE JUDGE.
12 users responded in this post
Hi,
Thank you! I would now go on this blog every day!
Thank you
Bodyc
Thank you for your comment. Our intent is to update the information as changes occur.
This material is a valuable resource. When honest people evaluate the evidence it is clear, Congressman Boucher is pro-abortion.
The listing of Boucher’s votes on myriad issues ends with the words, “YOU BE THE JUDGE.”
I cannot judge wisely concerning Boucher’s stance on the enumerated votes since there is no information as to his reasons for making his decisions. However, even without knowing the logic, study, and dedication put forth before each of his commitments, I will say that I agree with his decisions in the majority of the referenced votes. This kind of “exposure” has no place in a public display of partisan politicking, although it will undoubtedly influence the lowest common denominator of the public intelligencia.
However, judging by the lack of comments herein, the affect is minimal.
Thank you for your input. I respect your opinion and right to express how you feel. You may be right in that the affect may be minimal; however, one has the right to try. Oh, wait. Didn’t this web site have an affect on …… YOU?
It is sad that you feel such self-annointed condescending ridicule of only “the lowest common denominator of public intelligencia” is “influenced”. It is, in part, that very arrogant attitude which partly motivated the creation of this website. Average Americans are tired of being slapped down for getting involved and standing up to speak. I do respectfully agree with your comment, however, that you “cannot judge wisely”. Perhaps you could take a lesson in humility from the lowest common denominator of public intelligencia.
Let’s see. You say you lack the knowledge and background to form a wise opinion on how Mr. Boucher votes; yet, … you agree with most of his votes. Wow. You just explained precisely how Mr. Boucher gets elected! Please continue to reference this web site for informed knowledge. It may help to remedy your confusion. (We also noticed that you are the person who e-mailed this web site earlier seeking help as to how add your comments to the blog. I am glad to see that we could help you in that area also). Now, where were we … Oh wait, almost forgot. You were addressing …. intelligencia …..
Since Boucher votes in virtual lock step with Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank (96.7% of the time), I assume you are also passionately pro abortion on demand, pro partial-birth abortion, against parental consent of abortions for minors, and agree that taxpayers should pay for abortions here as well as in foreign countries. Since Boucher has a 100% approval rating from the ACLU, then it is safe to assume that you also agree with that organizaton.
By the way, as far as having “minimal affect”, we are now getting between 5 and 20 hits per day on this NEW website … from folks in the 9th District. And the number is growing steadily. Thank you.
Thank you for your input. Mr. Boucher was a co-sponsor of the pending “Freedom of Choice Act” which would erase all restrictions on abortion (and partial-birth abortion) and mandate that taxpayers pay all costs here as well as in foreign countries. The bill (HR1964), introduced 2/19/07, did not come up for vote possibly due to Bush’s probable veto. The bill would have to be re-introduced in the current session of congress which apparently is on its way by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (NY) and Sen. Barbara Boxer.
Will be updating as Mr. Boucher casts his votes. We continue to monitor his activities. So far, it appears that he is still tied to the hip of Obama. One ongoing development that many people are watching closely is his co-sponsor of the so-called “Freedom of Choice Act”. That is a bill to make abortion available on demand and paid for by taxpayer money both here and in foreign countries. That would be the most sweeping PRO-abortion measure since Roe vs. Wade. Many folks are indicating their frustration with Boucher’s “tone deaf” attitude to the wishes of the majority of people in his District. We will be sure to update as events occur.
Thank you for your input. I just read a note forwarded to me about Boucher’s recent “townhall meeting”. The note was entitled “From Cong. Rick Boucher’s World of the Absurd”. Apparently Boucher had a tough day in that people actually questioned him with FACTS and TRUTH. Boucher started the meeting, as usual, by ticking off all the pork he was bringing to the district. The first question he faced was, “How are we going to pay for all this stuff your’e buying Congressman?”. He then got angry questions about TARP and all the bail-outs which Boucher voted for.
When asked about his support for the so-called sweeping PRO-ABORTION “Freedom of Choice Act”, Boucher apparently denied that there was any such thing as a Freedom of Choice Act and he definitely was against it. That Bill would be the most sweeping PRO-abortion action of of our lifetime and, among other things, would wipe out any and all abortion restrictions currently in existence. In follow-up questions, about particular details of FOCA, Boucher again said that he was against each detail of the proposed Bill that he was asked about. (A question comes to mind …. If he denied the proposed Bill’s existence, then how could he be against something he said didn’t exist?)
THEN, it was revealed that some people in the audience had copies of the FREEDOM OF CHOICE ACT which has Boucher’s name on it …. as a CO-SPONSOR!
The beat goes on. It is encouraging to see that folks in the 9th District are now confronting Mr. Boucher with TRUTH and FACTS.
Again, thank you for your input.
By further explanation, it is a fact that Boucher co-sponsored the Freedom Of Choice Act (HR1964) on April 19, 2007. Because it did not come up for a vote, then it is “erased” and would then need to be re-introduced in this current session of congress. Boucher responded in his usual intellectually dishonest and misleading way on March 10, 2009 by saying that there is “no such bill”. He further states that “No legislation entitled Freedom of Choice has been introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives. There is no legislation pending before the House by that name, nor has any action been taken by any House committee or by full House of Representatives on such a measure”. He goes on to say, “Any information you may have received to the contrary is inaccurate”. He is, I guess, technically correct. However, he fails to be truthfully forthcoming. Keep in mind that his letter is dated MARCH 10.
FOUR DAYS EARLIER, on MARCH SIXTH, a spokesman for Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat who is Chairman of a House Judiciary subcommittee that could consider the bill, said the bill is forthcoming. llan Kayatsky told the St. Louis Dispatch that FOCA “is among the congressman’s [Nadler] priorities. We expect to reintroduce it sooner rather than later.” “We expect it to be the same bill with some minor tweaks.” He indicated that he expects pro-abortion Barbara Boxer to introduce a companion bill shortly.
Anyway, pro-abortion Boucher (100% approval rating from NARAL and Planned Parenthood and a “0″ rating from National Right to Life) plays down the coming introduction of the FOCA bill.
Boucher appears to be like a bubble on a skillet when it comes to pinning him down on the full truth. (Keep in mind that Boucher said that Barack Obama is a “friend of gun owners” while the National Rifle Association said that Obama would be “the most anti-gun president in American history”.
It is a shame that many of Boucher’s constituents have learned to resort to alternative sources just in order to get forthcoming and fully truthful information from the man - our elected representative.
Hi,
http://www.boucherexposed.com - da best. Keep it going!
Thanks
Joker
Love it!!
In a recent letter to pro-life constituents, Congressman Boucher left the impression that the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) is a myth.
Here are a few facts about FOCA and Mr. Boucher:
Fact – The National Organization For Women (NOW) promotes FOCA on their website.
Fact – Jerold Nadler has been the prime sponsor of FOCA. On March 6, 2009, The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported that “A spokesman for Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y. said, …We expect to reintroduce it [FOCA] sooner rather than later.”
Fact – The Library of Congress website shows that in the last Congress, Mr. Boucher co-sponsored FOCA on April 19, 2007.
Fact – FOCA, as written for the 110th Congress, has Mr. Boucher’s name on the front of the Bill.
Fact – July 17, 2007 Barack Obama, speaking to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund said, “The first thing I’d do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act.”
Fact – Mr. Boucher has a pro-FOCA record that goes back to May 1993 and pro-choice voting record that goes back to 1988.
Fact – The proponents of FOCA such as NOW disagree with Mr. Boucher and his pro-choice supporters about the effects of FOCA.
Fact – If pro-life supporters wait for the legislation to be introduced to voice their opposition, it will be too late.
His recent letter to pro-life constituents, in which he leaves the impression that the FOCA is a myth, is not honest.
If Mr. Boucher and his supporters want to debate the facts, we’re ready. But why does Mr. Boucher want to run from the facts? If he regrets cosponsoring the Freedom of Choice Act in 2007 and his 20 year pro-choice (Pro-abortion) voting record, he should say so. He shouldn’t be deceptive.
Mr. Boucher owes his constituents an apology and he owes his constituents an honest dialogue.
Excellent input. Thank you and let’s continue to spread the word.
Leave A Reply