3 comments

• 

  daddysteve

  10 months ago

  States rights? What a novel concept. I can remember a recent presidential candidate expressing these sentiments and it didn't seem to go over so well in Iowa. I guess these ideas are just naive and quaint until they affect someone directly. BTW- how long has the Iowa Independent been around because I'm from Davenpit and I've never heard of it. Of course I don't get around much.
  reply
• 

  rtia friest

  10 months ago

  Thank you!!!!! I believe women and their Drs. are very capable of making decisions pertaining to womens health care. This would set women and basic human rights back years if Bush were able to pass this.
  reply
• 

  Diane E.

  10 months ago

  I question Bush's right to do this without stepping in a legal mess. Of course, this back-channel behind the scenes surprise governance is a tactic that he has used repeatedly to get what he wants. Example - His lawyers find language in the Constitution that may be open to interpretation. Then they come up with a specious legal argument to support extraordinary rights of the Executive branch to do anything. Bush then uses this argument as cover to enact whatever agenda he favors (such as using torture). Those who disagree with his right then must fight the legality in Congress and/or deal with protracted court proceedings. In the meantime, Bush gets his way. If Bush does get this through, I would insist that my state representatives fight back HARD. It's time for Congress to immediately enact legislation to protect us from overreaching executives attempting to make changes to rules or definitions that infringe on legislative prerogatives pertaining to this or any other subject. This is not an authoritarian government and one man's view of what the "rules" should be on ANY subject must not take precedence over the peoples' consent. America must be better than that.
  reply