On January 10, 2012, Liberty Institute announced a major pro-life victory when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit declared constitutional the recently enacted Texas Sonogram Law, also known as HB 15.

The Fifth Circuit’s decision overturned a controversial ruling by U.S. District Judge Sparks, which enjoined the Texas law co-authored by Senator Dan Patrick and Representative Sid Miller and was signed into law by Governor Rick Perry in May 2011. The law requires doctors and certified sonographers to perform a sonogram on women seeking an abortion at least 24 hours before the procedure.

“This is one of the most important victories in the past 10 years for informed consent for women seeking an abortion,” said Jonathan Saenz, Liberty Institute Attorney who heads the office at the Texas Capitol and provided the main legal testimony for the bill during the legislative process. “Women and unborn children in Texas are safer today because of this decision and no longer subject to the abuse of abortion doctors who deny women critical medical information.”

HB 15, which amends the 2003 Texas Woman’s Right to Know Act, requires the physician “who is to perform an abortion” to perform and display a sonogram of the fetus, make audible the heart auscultation of the fetus for the woman to hear, as well as explain to her the results of each procedure and to wait 24 hours, in most cases, between these disclosures and performing the abortion.

Senator Patrick said, “I was always confident that our bill would survive any constitutional question because our goal from the beginning was to protect the woman’s right to know, protect the unborn, and protect the constitution.”

Representative Sid Miller, said, “I commend the court of appeals for this just decision which confirms that women have every right to be fully informed about the abortion decision and that my fellow Texas lawmakers who supported this law stayed within the bounds of U.S. Supreme Court precedent.”

In August, on behalf of Senator Patrick and Representative Miller and in support of the law, Liberty Institute filed an amicus brief in the lawsuit seeking to strike down Texas’ new sonogram law (HB 15), which was originally scheduled to go into effect on September 1, 2011.

Senator Patrick and Representative Miller were the authors of HB 15 in the Texas Senate and Texas House of Representatives, respectively.  Liberty Institute argued that HB 15 is consistent with The Supreme Court and only requires the disclosure of truthful and accurate information to allow women to make informed decisions regarding their pregnancies.

The article Texas’ Sonogram Law Ruling is a Big Victory for Pro-Lifers appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Rick Perry, the governor of Texas and one of the current GOP presidential candidates, has the most experience when it comes to finding solutions to illegal immigration, border patrol, and drug cartels in Mexico. Drug cartels are a rapidly growing threat to Mexico as a whole and also have the potential to spew over the border into the United States if something is not done, and done soon.

Perry is trying to come up with some solutions to solve the crisis that has not been effectively addressed by Washington. Perry’s potential plan of action to solve the ongoing threat of drug cartels in Mexico was presented in New Hampshire this past week. He stated, “It may require our military in Mexico working in concert with them to kill these drug cartels and to keep them off of our border.”

Although the idea seems sufficient for dealing with crimes in Mexico, the Mexican government has not responded with open arms to the hypothetical idea. Arturo Sarukhan, the Ambassador to Mexico stated, “The matter of the participation or presence of U.S. troops on Mexican soil is not on the table.”

This is not the first time Perry has been faced with concerns involving Mexico. Being along the border, Perry has had his hands full and dug deep into the pockets of the constituents in his state to control illegal immigrants from crossing the border.

Perry has spent more than  $230 million dollars in securing the Texas-Mexico border from his office’s budget, including putting more Texas police on the ground near the border, surveillance cameras, and hiring additional law enforcement. He also believes it is the job of the Federal government, and not the state, to deal with the problem of border patrol.

Another issue facing Perry is how to handle the immigrants that are already in the state of Texas that have successfully crossed the border. One of his policies allows in-state tuition for illegal immigrants, saving them close to $100,000 in schooling over four years. He stated, “In 2001, we had this choice: Are we going to kick these children over to the curb and say you cannot have access to college? Because the fact of the matter is there’s no way they could pay the out-of-state tuition.”

This plan quickly backfired in the most recent debate and several  candidates challenged him on this topic, including Rick Santorum referring to him as “soft” on immigration. Santorum also pointed out  problems with Perry’s stance on illegal immigration in a Newsmax  interview. He concludes that Perry is doing three things wrong in dealing with illegal immigrants.

First he thinks Perry’s opposition to a fence along the border and using  troops on the ground instead to defend the border has been ineffective. Secondly he believes that Perry has promoted incentive programs that attract immigrants to come to the country illegally such as the in-state tuition policy.

Lastly, Santorum thinks Perry isn’t doing enough about illegal immigrants as far as locating and  deporting them. From illegal immigration, border patrol, and drug cartels it seems as if Rick Perry has been faced with them all. Whether other candidates agree with Perry or not, he has probably spent more time and money on the issue than any other candidate running for election in 2012.

He may be the best qualified in providing  solutions regarding these issues.

Image Courtesy of  http://www.flickr.com/photos/gageskidmore/

The article Rick Perry vs The Mexican Border appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

After much criticism, Texas governor Rick Perry is attempting to soften his criticism on social security. This marks his fourth flip on the issue. Perry, the current front-runner in the Republican presidential nomination, wrote an op-ed piece on Monday for USA Today. Although he still maintained that social security needs to be overhauled, he refrained from some of the more inciting rhetoric he has favored in the past.

Instead of calling the system a “ponzi scheme,” he wrote of “dire financial challenges facing the nearly 80-year old program” and emphasized the need to protect benefits for current recipients and those “nearing retirement.” In his article, entitled “I am going to be honest with the American people,” Perry stated that older workers would still be protected. “For younger workers, we must consider reforms to make Social Security financially viable.”

“I am going to be honest with the American people. Our elected leaders must have the strength to speak frankly about entitlement reform if we are to right our nation’s financial course and get the USA working again. For too long, politicians have been afraid to speak honestly about Social Security. We must have the guts to talk about its financial condition if we are to fix Social Security and make it financially viable for generations to come,” Perry wrote in his short piece.

Despite the change in tone, it is unclear how long this will last. When he first jumped into the race, Perry attempted to distance himself from his book, “FED UP!” where he first described social security as a “ponzi scheme.” However, last week at the Republican debate, the governor doubled down on his initial assessment, repeating the phrase and calling social security, “a monstrous lie.”

Other presidential candidates have criticized Perry for his remarks; however, the statements have not hurt him in the polls. A new CNN/Tea Party Express poll out Monday showed Perry with the same lead over former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney as he had two weeks ago, 30 percent to 18 percent. Perry also is leading Romney over electability.

Forty-two percent of voters believe that Perry could beat President Obama compared to Romney’s 26 percent. Rep. Michele Bachmann continues slipping, dropping to four percent in the poll, down from ten percent just two weeks ago.

The article Governor Rick Perry Softens Social Security Stance appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The federal courts could be in for a dramatic change if Texas governor Rick Perry wins the presidency. The Republican presidential hopeful is looking to curb the court’s alleged ‘judicial activism’ by ending the practice of appointing justices for life.

Under the US Constitution, federal judges (including Supreme Court justices) hold their seats for life and can only be removed after an impeachment trial in the Senate. Because their extended tenure allows them to shape judicial policy long after the president who appointed them has left office, their confirmation hearings in the Senate have become increasingly bitter in recent years.

In his 2010 book Fed Up!, Perry describes the Supreme Court as “nine oligarchs in robes” and calls for measures “to restrict the unlimited power of the courts to rule over us with no accountability.”

One of the measures that Perry briefly discusses is stripping justices of their life tenure. Instead, he supports a system where terms are staggered so that there is a retirement every two years or so. Each justice would serve for eighteen years, which would prevent any one president from being able to appoint a majority of the court.

Although Perry has cast his argument in terms of restraining judicial activism, others have called for an end to life tenure on medical grounds. In a January 2011 article on the the independent news site ProPublica, Joseph Goldstein highlighted the effect of senility and dementia on the federal bench.

He revealed that the percentage of octogenarians and nonagenarians hearing cases in federal courts has doubled over the past twenty years. Furthermore, forcing a debilitated judge off the bench is incredibly difficult. At present, it is usually done by behind-the-scenes peer pressure from fellow judges.

The last impeachment for mental incapacity was in 1803, and while it is possible for a federal judge to be forcibly retired due to permanent disability, this has only happened twice in the past twenty years.

Currently, there is a form of semi-retirement in place for federal judges. If a judge has reached the age of 65 and has served for at least fifteen years, they may elect to assume senior status, which entitles them to work part-time even though they have vacated their seat. They also continue to draw their full salary.

Although the scheme is designed to let elderly judges step aside with dignity to make room for new talent, its voluntary nature may undermine its effectiveness. Also, the idea of a judge handling any cases while suffering from a cognitive impairment tends to undermine confidence in the judiciary.

Although the majority of octogenarians and nonagenarians on the federal bench are almost certainly fit to serve, the question of what to do with judges who refuse to resign due to their declining faculties is one that will assume new urgency as the average lifespan increases.

In the end, it may be biology, not politics, that lends credence to Perry’s plan.

Christopher Halloran / Shutterstock.com

The article Rick Perry Contemplates Ending Life Tenure For Top Judges appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.