Anonymous wrote:Here's a pretty good article on the subject, although I hate the magazine ha ha.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2021/09/02/what-happens-without-roe-dc-maryland-virginia/

That article is a bit naive. See this section:

Of course, if a determined Congress was able to overcome the local pols and really nix the budget unless the District agreed to an abortion ban, it could be a political nightmare for whoever pushed it—images of the capital city’s government idled over a social-policy crusade might not play well back home. This is a very unlikely scenario.

Whoever wrote that is on drugs. Images of DC's government being crippled due to abortion would play tremendously well in many parts of the US.

I think many of those posting on DCUM have never really had to suffer from political developments other than possibly seeing their taxes increase. The thought that a right they take for granted may be taken away from them is a completely foreign concept. Therefore, they find all kinds of ways that it couldn't happen.

Republicans on multiple previous occasions have threatened to shutdown the entire US government unless DC was prohibited from using its own tax dollars to fund abortions. Do you think the wouldn't do the same to force a prohibition on abortion?

Well they’ve made it so that no federal employee insurance, Medicare nor Medicaid would pay for abortions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's not get ahead of ourselves.

Under the Home Rule Act, Congress has the right to reject any laws passed by the DC Council -- not to pass any law it wants specifically targeting DC.

I've honestly never heard anyone outside of this forum -- and certainly no one in the DC government -- express concern that if Roe v Wade is overturned Congress can turn around and pass a law banning all abortions in DC.

That's probably because you never heard anyone express serious concern that the Supreme Court would overturn an almost 50-year-old precedent.

Oh really? I would have had to be living under a rock not to hear that. It's been a front and center issue in the national political landscape since Roe was decided.

Well, no it hasn't. It took several years before the Republican evangelicals decided to make it an issue. Also, who do you know who actually believed the Supreme Court would actually do this?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's not get ahead of ourselves.

Under the Home Rule Act, Congress has the right to reject any laws passed by the DC Council -- not to pass any law it wants specifically targeting DC.

I've honestly never heard anyone outside of this forum -- and certainly no one in the DC government -- express concern that if Roe v Wade is overturned Congress can turn around and pass a law banning all abortions in DC.

That's probably because you never heard anyone express serious concern that the Supreme Court would overturn an almost 50-year-old precedent.

Oh really? I would have had to be living under a rock not to hear that. It's been a front and center issue in the national political landscape since Roe was decided.

Anonymous wrote:Let's not get ahead of ourselves.

Under the Home Rule Act, Congress has the right to reject any laws passed by the DC Council -- not to pass any law it wants specifically targeting DC.

I've honestly never heard anyone outside of this forum -- and certainly no one in the DC government -- express concern that if Roe v Wade is overturned Congress can turn around and pass a law banning all abortions in DC.

That's probably because you never heard anyone express serious concern that the Supreme Court would overturn an almost 50-year-old precedent.