I know; there are three other members named Davis in the Texas
legislature. Nevertheless, the
real question is why did Sarah Davis get such a liberal ranking in the 83rd
Legislature, according to the Lib-Con IDEAL score calculated by Mark Jones,
Rice University?
To explore this anomaly, I went to the Vote Smart Web site. Here are her votes in the 83rd
Legislature on important issues:
July 10, 2013
|
Bill Passed - House
(96 - 49) |
Nay
|
||
June 24, 2013
|
Bill Passed - House
(95 - 34) |
Nay
|
||
June 21, 2013
|
Bill Passed - House
(109 - 30) |
Yea
|
||
June 21, 2013
|
Bill Passed - House
(93 - 46) |
Yea
|
||
June 21, 2013
|
Bill Passed - House
(93 - 47) |
Yea
|
||
May 25, 2013
|
Conference Report Adopted - House
(118 - 29) |
Yea
|
||
May 24, 2013
|
Concurrence Vote Passed - House
(78 - 61) |
Yea
|
||
May 22, 2013
|
Bill Passed - House
(104 - 42) |
Yea
|
||
May 15, 2013
|
Joint Resolution Failed - House
(61 - 80) |
Nay
|
||
May 10, 2013
|
Bill Passed - House
(71 - 61) |
Yea
|
||
May 9, 2013
|
Bill Passed - House
(73 - 58) |
Nay
|
||
May 8, 2013
|
Bill Passed - House
(117 - 24) |
Yea
|
||
May 7, 2013
|
Bill Passed - House
(101 - 31) |
Yea
|
||
May 6, 2013
|
Bill Passed - House
(123 - 22) |
Yea
|
||
May 6, 2013
|
Bill Passed - House
(100 - 47) |
Yea
|
||
May 6, 2013
|
Bill Passed - House
(102 - 41) |
Yea
|
||
May 6, 2013
|
Bill Passed - House
(116 - 30) |
Yea
|
||
May 4, 2013
|
Bill Passed - House
(87 - 42) |
Yea
|
||
May 3, 2013
|
Bill Passed - House
(79 - 64) |
Nay
|
||
May 2, 2013
|
Bill Passed - House
(99 - 47) |
Yea
|
||
May 1, 2013
|
Bill Passed - House
(120 - 21) |
Yea
|
||
April 26, 2013
|
Bill Passed - House
(93 - 48) |
Yea
|
||
April 18, 2013
|
Bill Passed - House
(97 - 45) |
Nay
|
||
Feb. 5, 2013
|
House
|
Sponsor
|
||
Feb. 1, 2013
|
House
|
Co-sponsor
|
There is no doubt in my mind that she earned her Lib-Con
IDEAL score as a result of the following votes and sponsored bills: equal pay
for women and on abortion. Otherwise, her votes are conservative. To answer
critics of her vote on HB 2 during a special session, she wrote the followng
op-ed for the Houston Chronicle:
The omnibus abortion bill has
serious problems. Part of the omnibus bill bans all abortions after 20 weeks
gestation. Let me be clear: A five-month ban, with exceptions of life and
health of the mother, severe fetal abnormality, and in cases of rape and/or
incest, is very reasonable. However, many House
Republicans rejected my effort to add these important exceptions when I
offered them as an amendment. Without such exceptions, the ban is likely to be
unconstitutional, and it has been deemed such by other courts.
Another component of the bill
requires all abortions be performed in ambulatory surgical centers. This
appears reasonable, except that the result would be the closure of all but six
facilities. It already is state law that abortions performed at 16 weeks or
later must be performed in ambulatory surgical centers.
A significant number of abortions
are induced with oral medication only. Why make a women enter a surgical suite
to receive pills? It is an incredible misuse of medical resources that drives
up the cost of care and leads to delays, which drive up the risks associated
with the procedure.
Many Republicans, including me,
have consistently opposed Obamacare because of its intrusion into the
doctor-patient relationship. Yet, the omnibus abortion legislation is precisely
the same thing: the government sticking its reach into the doctor's office.
Further, the bill requires doctors
who provide abortions to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital. On its
face, this requirement also sounds reasonable except that in the exceedingly
rare event that a complication after an abortion requires hospital-based care,
a woman would be provided emergency care at any hospital she chooses and
admission privileges at that hospital have no impact on a woman's ability to
receive high-quality, timely care. We also cannot ignore the testimony from The
Texas Hospital Association that its members would not grant such admitting
privileges. Ultimately, this requirement, too, will serve to make the omnibus
bill likely unconstitutional, as no physician will be able to obtain the
required and unnecessary admitting privileges.
Although I have the deepest respect
for those who are so passionate on both sides of the abortion issue, I believe,
at its core, the Republican
Party stands for personal freedom, which is lost when government controls
our lives.
I cannot support government
dictating to us where and how we obtain health care, or how much of our income
the government thinks is fair to confiscate and redistribute to others. And I
cannot support government dictating how responsible women deal with the very
personal issue of forced, unhealthy or unwanted pregnancies prior to viability.
She preceded her justification for her vote on the abortion
bill with a statement of her political philosophy:
As a proud
Republican, I believe the strength of our nation lies with the individual and
that each person's dignity, freedom, ability and responsibility must be
honored.
Personal
freedom and limited government are the foundation of my political philosophy. I
believe the proper role of government is to provide only those critical
functions that cannot be performed by individuals or private organizations and
that the best government is that which governs least.
To me, she’s undoubtedly a
conservative. The question is: Will being the only Republican in the Texas
House to vote against the Omnibus Abortion Bill earn her a Tea Party challenger
in the 2014 Republican primary election? My guess is that it will. What do you
think?
Interesting analysis of her voting record compared to her score. My guess is that she will face a Tea Party primary opponent. It's so hard sticking to one's integrity these days AND getting elected. And I say that with only a hint of sarcasm.
ReplyDelete