H.R. 1964: | Freedom of Choice Act |
110th Congress 2007-2008 |
To protect, consistent with Roe v. Wade, a woman's freedom to choose to bear a child or terminate a pregnancy, and for other purposes.
OverviewSponsor: | | Text: | Summary
|
Full Text | Status: |  | Introduced | Apr 19, 2007 | | Referred to Committee | View Committee Assignments |  | Reported by Committee | (did not occur) | | House Vote | (did not occur) | | Senate Vote | (did not occur) | | Signed by President | (did not occur) |
This bill never became law.
This bill was proposed in a previous session of Congress. Sessions
of Congress last two years, and at the end of each session all
proposed bills and resolutions that haven't passed are cleared from the books.
Members often reintroduce bills that did not come up for debate
under a new number in the next session.
| Last Action: | May 4, 2007:
Referred to the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties. | Related: | See the Related Legislation page for other bills related to this one and a list of subject terms
that have been applied to this bill.
Sometimes the text of one bill or resolution is incorporated into another, and in those cases the original bill or resolution, as it would appear here, would seem to be abandoned. |
|
Question & Answer 
Can you answer any of these questions posed by other users? Think of it as a civic good deed.
See 1 more question posed on this topic or submit your own question on the Q&A page.
Jan 26, 2009 6:34 PM - Would this bill legally prohibit doctors or hospitals from declaring a conscientious objection to performing an abortion? -
Read AnswersAnswered by a visitor on Jan 31, 2009 5:14 PM -
The bishops of the US state that they will close all private hospitals if this "outrageous" bill passes. Thirty percent (30%) of all hospitals are private. Answered by a visitor on Feb 15, 2009 6:07 PM -
No. The text of the act only prohibits the Governments or anyone acting in the capacity of a public official (Sec 3.) from taking action to prevent the performance of an abortion (Sec. 4). The mention of private individuals or institutions is absent completely. Furthermore the term "conscientious objector" is nearly synonymous with "peaceful protest", an activity specifically protected by the First Amendment. Mar 4, 2009 6:12 PM - Does this bill prevent a religious organization or hospital from denying abortion due to religious principles? -
Read AnswersAnswered by a visitor on Apr 7, 2009 11:49 PM -
I believe the goal is to cut off government funding to hospitals that choose not to perform abortions. |
Sources of Influence
MAPLight.org reports that the following organizations
have taken a stance on this bill:
| Support | Oppose |
|---|
American Civil Liberties Union National Organization of Women NARAL Pro-Choice America Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice | National Right to Life Committee |
Follow the link to MAPLight.org to see if campaign contributions from employees of these organizations are correlated with how Members of Congress voted on this bill.
Because the U.S. Congress posts most legislative information online one legislative day after events occur, GovTrack is usually one legislative day behind. For more information about where this data comes from, see
About GovTrack.us.
H.R. 1964--110th Congress: Freedom of Choice Act.
(2007).
In GovTrack.us (database of federal legislation).
Retrieved Nov 22, 2009, from
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-1964
"H.R. 1964--110th Congress: Freedom of Choice Act."
GovTrack.us (database of federal legislation).
2007.
Nov 22, 2009
<http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-1964>
{{cite web
|url=http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-1964
|title=H.R. 1964
|accessdate=Nov 22, 2009
|author=110th Congress (2007)
|date=Apr 19, 2007
|work=Legislation
|publisher=GovTrack.us
|quote=Freedom of Choice Act
}}
