Kamala Harris says her first priority as president is to "stop this pain" resulting from abortion bans

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: CBS News

October 27, 2024 / 9:14 AM EDT


The Beyoncé song "Freedom" has become Kamala Harris' anthem – and it was a message the vice president took to the campaign trail, as CBS News traveled with Harris over two days for a behind-the-scenes look during the final stretch of the 2024 election.

Asked by "CBS Evening News" anchor and managing editor Norah O'Donnell why she chose to campaign that night in Texas (a reliably red state), Harris replied, "Texas is ground zero on this most extraordinary issue, which is that we are fighting for a woman's right to make decisions about her own body." On Friday, at Houston's Shell Energy Stadium – the vice president's largest rally yet – 30,000 people endured 90-degree heat to hear her scorching new attack on Texas' strict abortion ban, which has become a lightning rod for women's rights.

In an attack on Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton's lawsuit aimed at accessing women's medical records if they cross state lines to seek an abortion where it is legal, Harris said, "On the one hand, Donald Trump won't let anyone see his medical records. And on the other hand, they want to get their hands on your medical records. Simply put: They are out of their minds."

It was a message underscored by Beyoncé, who told the crowd, "I'm not here as a celebrity; I'm not here as a politician. I'm here as a mother, a mother who cares deeply about the world my children and all of our children live in, a world where we have the freedom to control our bodies, a world where we're not divided."

Read more: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kamala-harris-on-abortion-first-priority-as-president-restoring-roe-v-wade/

[Dock_Yard]

1. We need Senate and House majorities BADLY to make this happen

[CousinIT]

2. Jon Tester, Tammy Baldwin and Mary Peltola need $$$

Send it if you have it.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

3. The radicalized Republican party wants to spy on your genitals, your periods, your bedroom.

[maxsolomon]

4. I'm not exactly sure how a President Harris stops State Abortion Bans.

The SCOTUS let the horse out of the barn.

[BumRushDaShow]

5. "I'm not exactly sure how a President Harris stops State Abortion Bans."

Enact a federal law.

I think there's a lot of confusion about Roe and that is because Roe was nothing more than a federal court decision (NOT a "law" ) that threw out STATE LAWS banning abortion. To emphasize - it was never a federal law, but the decision put restrictions on states passing bans, nationally.

This is why you hear the term "codify Roe" mentioned.

Now should such be enacted, there would of course be lawsuits from the loons claiming it is "unconstitutional" but that is why whatever is crafted, needs to be Constitutionally-sound. The current bill that had actually passed the House in 2021 but died in the Senate (due to cloture) was this -

H.R.3755 - Women's Health Protection Act of 2021

It's been brought up several times during this current Congress and obviously now ignored by the House (where the Senate's version is also dead, again thanks to cloture (a/k/a that 60 vote threshold to advance a bill to debate)).

[maxsolomon]

6. The reason I wasn't sure was because of the filibuster

not because I don't know how legislation works.

[BumRushDaShow]

7. The Senate Rules can be changed by a simple majority

Of course when the GOP was busy blocking Obama nominees, the-then Majority Leader Harry Reid said enough is enough and was able to push through "the nuclear option" - changing the Rule to remove the 60-vote threshold (cloture) for nominees - but in that case, EXCEPT for putting someone on the Supreme Court, which would still require the 60-votes to advance the nomination to the debate.

But as soon as Turtle took over the Senate, HE pushed through the Rule change to allow a SCOTUS appointment to similarly only need a simple majority, and he managed to shove 3 unqualified LOONS onto the court.

This is why there is so much rancor about changing the Rule for anything - including legislation. There have been discussions about doing "carve-outs" for allowing routine stuff through without needing 60 votes but then we have the big things (voting rights, reproductive rights, etc) that probably wouldn't meet that test of "routine" (although common sense would dictate that they do) and would never get passed without us having a super-majority.

So that is where things stand.

It is the abuse of "the honor system" by the GOP for their own political gain.

[maxsolomon]

8. Yes, they can. But they probably won't be.

It's TBD whether Dems even control the Senate next year.

[BumRushDaShow]

9. Yup

although I know that even if we hold all (except obviously WV, and without any unexpected pickups), leading to a tie, and can take the WH, there may be careful carve-outs done at the behest of the President.

In some cases, there was some bipartisan support for big bills and even to possible carve-outs, but not enough to hit the 60.

This is also with the expectation of taking back the House, which the media has either been uncharacteristically silent about or tacitly clinging to the expectation that despite all the changes in Congressional Districts to shift them bluer or at least make them more competitive (with us only needing 5 seats) - that would be irrelevant and the GOP will hold the House.