Tag: Bill Clinton

Republicans Overplaying Their Hand Again

Personally, I think Bill Clinton’s pardoning of Marc Rich was one of the few things he did in his last days in office that was worthwhile. The Republicans and Democrats (and most of the country as far as I can tell) disagree, and nobody seems happy about it.

But it seems like the Republicans are once again overplaying their hand. Newt Gingrich and other Republicans almost created a disaster with by not understanding how far they could go with the impeachment hearings, and a lot of the rhetoric coming from Congressional Republicans seems to indicate they still haven’t learned their lesson.

Whether you agree with it or not, the Constitution is incredibly clear that Clinton can pardon whoever he wants. If Republicans are seriously going to claim that it was improper that Denise Richards bought her husband’s pardon with her huge donations to the Democrats, they might as well line up to have all their own heads chopped off as this sort of thing happens every week in Washington, DC. (And the notion they would indict Denise Rich because her ex-husband gave her money is so absurd, I can’t believe they’re even discussing this publicly).

Give Republicans enough time, though, and somehow they’ll find a way in this mess to make Clinton seem like a sympathetic victim. THey don’t seem to be able to stop the growth of big government, but they do excel at shooting themselves in the foot on a regular basis.

Why Didn’t He Pardon Tim McVeigh While He Was At It?

PlanetOut reports that one of the women pardoned by Bill Clinton on his last day in office had been serving time after being caught with 700 pounds of explosives that she admitted she planned to use in terrorist bombings. Yet another woman pardoned by Clinton was serving time for bombings carried out in the early 1980s to protest the U.S. invasion of Grenada.

I just don’t get Democrats. On the one hand, Ted Kennedy rips on the John Ashcroft for daring to suggest that the Second Amendment was created specifically to prevent government tyranny (which it clearly was as anyone who has read the Federalist Papers would realize). But then Clinton turns around and pardons a woman who participated in actual bombings, including a failed plan to bomb the U.S. Capitol.

In what weird universe does that make sense?

FDA Approves RU486 — With Restrictions

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today finally approved the abortion-inducing drug RU-486 after more than 12 years of battles between pro- and anti-abortion forces. Unfortunately while they approved it, the FDA attached ridiculous restrictions to the drug that will make obtaining the drug more of a hassle for women.

The drug, originally developed in France, blocks a hormone, progesterone, which in turn causes the lining of the uterine wall to thin resulting in a spontaneous abortion. The drug is more than 90 percent effect in causing an abortion if taken within 49 days of the beginning of a woman’s last menstrual period.

In a bizarre, though not unexpected, move, the FDA placed numerous restrictions on RU486 approving it only for distribution by doctors who, as the Associated Press described it, “can operate in case a surgical abortion is needed to finish the job or in cases of severe bleeding — or to doctors who have made advance arrangements for a surgeon to provide such care to their patients.”

This is ridiculous. This would be like saying that only surgeons able to preform back surgery should be able to dispense medication for back pain. Millions of people see non-surgeons for heart and other ailments which might later call for surgery without having to find a doctor who himself is a surgeon.

The Associated Press story on the approval speculates RU486 might become an issue of debate in upcoming presidential election, but oddly claimed that

Republican candidate George W. Bush opposes abortion; his father’s administration banned RU-486 from this country in 1989. The pro-choice Clinton-Gore administration worked for seven years to bring mifepristone here.

No, actually, Clinton-Gore did absolutely nothing for the past 7 years while the FDA stood around and dragged its feet on a drug approval that should have been extraordinarily routine, and apparently did nothing to try to dissuade the FDA of the ridiculous conditions they attached to the drug.

Source:

FDA approves abortion pill. The Associated Press, September 28, 2000.

FDA’s Patronizes Women with RU486 Restrictions

A couple months ago, I wrote about the U.S. Food and Drug Administration dragging its feet in approving the abortion pill RU-486 (|FDA vs. Women’s Health, Again|.) When he was running for president and needed women’s votes, Bill Clinton promised swift approval of RU-486 if he were elected. Of course once in office, Clinton forgot about his promise and, if anything, the Clinton FDA approach to RU-486 was far worse than the Reagan administration approach (at least the Reagan administration was frank enough to admit its ideological opposition to RU-486).

Now word comes from on high that the FDA is finally ready to approve RU-486. Unfortunately it is going to attach a set of unprecedented conditions that may make illegally smuggling the drug into the U.S. more viable than getting the drug via prescription.

First, the FDA wants all physicians who prescribe RU-486 to be part of a national registry of abortion pill providers. What genius at FDA thought this would be a good idea? Is it possible they’ve been so busy finding excuses not to approve the drug that they’ve missed the wave of anti-abortion violence directed against clinics and doctors over the past 20 years? The creation of a national registry is an open invitation for violent anti-abortion extremists.

Second, the FDA wants to limit the doctors who can prescribe RU-486 to just those doctors who are also qualified to perform surgical abortions. In addition the doctors would be required to hold admitting privileges to a hospital within one hour’s drive of their office. According to the FDA, the justification for this rule is that if RU-486 should not cause an abortion, the woman’s physician will be able to perform a surgical abortion. This is downright bizarre. My wife has chronic back pain and went to her physician for a pain killing prescription. Under the FDA’s logic, however, only a physician qualified to do back surgery should be allowed to write prescriptions for back pain. Women are clearly resourceful enough in this day and age to find a physician to perform a surgical abortion if RU-486 fails.

Finally, the FDA unbelievably wants to create some sort of system to track women who take RU-486, which it says is necessary to track any possible side effects from the drug.

The reality is that, again, the FDA seems more likely to be interested in presidential politics, not wanting to inject the RU-486 issue as an issue in the upcoming election. This is a drug that has been used safely and successfully in Europe for decades now — the requirements to limit and track who can prescribe the pill are completely unwarranted, as is the tracking of patients, considering the drug’s track record in Europe. As Dr. Michael Creinin of the University of Pittsburgh told CNN, “The FDA is creating a whole new standard with these restrictions” (FDA approval of abortion pill linked to stringent conditions).

The FDA should stop its shameful delaying tactics and approve RU-486 with all possible haste. Leave it to the Clinton administration to play politics with women’s health and reproductive choices.