I promise to defend and protect women's rights. I do not believe in the undue influence of government infringing on women's rights.
My opponent, Todd Young has a 0% rating from several pro-choice groups. He was previously endorsed by Richard Mourdock, a previous U.S. Senator (from Indiana) who once stated even pregnancy from rape was something God intended.
There was a time when abortions were simply a part of life in the U.S. It wasn’t until medical doctors faced fierce competition with midwives and other homeopathic providers that it became an issue in the late 1800s. This was followed by the women’s liberation movement in the 1960’s. Before the U.S. Supreme Court decision, Roe v. Wade decriminalized abortion nationwide in 1973, abortion was already legal in several states. So why are we still talking about this today? Because several states have enacted laws that violate Roe vs. Wade plainly, claiming viability (life) starts at conception. There are also remaining conflicts with the Fourteenth Amendment with regard to the fetus being deprived of life and the mother’s right of privacy. Most Americans (52% as of June 2019, Gallup) remain pro-choice and about 60% of Americans (2019 Gallup) believe Roe vs. Wade should not be overturned by any means. I believe congress should act in accordance with the will of the people. Any excessive restrictive state regulation of abortion is unconstitutional and should be dealt with. Furthermore, there should be a clear path to deal with any violations. Here's what I believe:
The decision to have an abortion is owed the right of privacy
The decision to have an abortion should not be infringed upon excessively
Under the Supremacy Clause of our Constitution, federal law preempts state law. For this reason, the establishment of federal statutory rights would invalidate any contradictory state laws. Therefore, as a member of Congress I will work to create and pass federal legislation that preempts any state effort that functionally limits access to abortion clinics.
Any law that functionally eliminates the ability of a pregnant person's access to abortion services should be halted by the federal government. Additionally, I do not believe in blocking patients from accessing care at health centers.
Americans must understand that, as a nation, we may never be able to agree on what one’s moral obligations should be, but we can respect each other’s rights as already granted by the provisions in Roe vs. Wade. Roe vs. Wade protects a pregnant person's liberty to choose to have an abortion without excessive government restriction or undue influence. Roe vs. Wade does not attempt to guarantee or propose to regulate how that choice is made or how it should be funded. Furthermore, it fails to address accessibility. It is a private medical procedure which should be handled as all others, with the utmost care and regard by medical professionals in their clinics.