House
Republicans are trying to block a new D.C. law that would legalize
physician-assisted suicide in the District, with the House
Appropriations Committee passing a measure last week that would repeal
the D.C. law.
In a 28-24 vote
Thursday evening, the Appropriations Committee agreed to repeal the act
as well as bar any funding to the city's program for implementing it.
President Trump’s proposed federal budget included a similar spending
ban but did not go as far as repealing the law, which went into effect
Feb. 20. The city needs $125,000 to pay for initial startup costs by
Oct. 1.
City
officials originally were optimistic about being able to fund the
measure without federal money, but the amendment introduced by Rep. Andy
Harris, R-Md., would repeal it altogether. D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser was
upset by the passage and said if anything the District will continue to
advocate for statehood now.
“None
of the members opposing our law were elected to represent our
residents,” Bowser said. “This is not a federal issue. This is a local
issue. Members of Congress who are interfering with our laws must begin
to realize what they are really doing: attempting to sidestep the
democratic process in order to impose their personal beliefs on 681,000
Washingtonians.”
Several
states around the country have approved laws that allow certain
terminally ill patients to request aid-in-dying medications from their
physicians. In passing its law last year, D.C. joined California,
Colorado, Oregon, Vermont and Washington, who also have legalized the
practice. Thirteen other states are actively considering similar bills.
The
D.C. law is modeled off of Oregon’s, and under it, competent,
terminally ill patients who are deemed to have less than six months to
live can request aid-in-dying medications from their doctors. Patients
must request the prescription twice in the company of two witnesses over
15 days and then must consume the pills without assistance.
In
California, 111 terminally ill patients killed themselves via
physician-assisted suicides in the first six months of legalization,
according to a report from the state's Department of Public Health.
Harris, who is a doctor, introduced his amendment because he believes the D.C. law is poorly thought out.
“Encouraging
patients to commit suicide deprives them of the opportunity to
potentially be cured by new treatments that could ameliorate their
condition and even add years to their lives, if not cure them
completely,” Harris said. “Congress has the authority — and the
responsibility — to oversee the operations of Washington D.C., and the
Death with Dignity Act was a well-intentioned but misguided policy that
must be reversed.” Two Republicans on the committee — Charlie Dent of
Pennsylvania and Dan Newhouse of Washington — opposed Harris' language.
J.J.
Hanson, president of the Patients' Rights Action Fund, said his
organization "takes a position on one issue only: assisted suicide laws.
We, therefore, welcome any efforts at the Congressional level or
otherwise to halt assisted suicide policy which will only put vulnerable
D.C. residents — the terminally ill, people with disabilities, and the
poor — at risk."
D.C. has had a mayor and council
since 1973, though Congress still holds some oversight over the city
such as the ability to block D.C. laws within 30 legislative working
days of being signed by the mayor. While the federal legislature holds
influence, it has only ever blocked three D.C. laws.
In
January, after Bowser signed the law, Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., and
Rep. Brad Wenstrup, R-Ohio, introduced resolutions aiming to block it,
but neither was introduced before the 30-day deadline for congressional
approval.
D.C.'s non-voting delegate in Congress, Eleanor Holmes Norton, criticized Harris’ approach to repealing the law.
“Representative
Harris has become a serial abuser of congressional power over the
District,” Norton said in a statement. “After we defeated attempts to
nullify the Death with Dignity Act through disapproval resolutions in
the House and Senate, Harris chose to hide in the appropriations process
and legislate through a spending bill.”
Josh
Burch, an organizer for Neighbors United for Statehood, a group
advocating for D.C. state sovereignty said Harris’ amendment is
“appalling, disgusting and hypocritical.”
“For us,
this is a local government issue and if Andy Harris cares so much about
the laws of the District of Columbia he should come and run for office
here. His district in Maryland has issues too and I’m sure his
constituents would appreciate it if he spent as much time paying
attention to issues there.”
The fate of the
spending bill passed by the Appropriations Committee remains unclear.
Congress has to approve some kind of measure to extend federal spending
once the annual budget runs out Sept. 30, but neither the full House nor
the Senate has voted on any of the dozen bills that fund the government
and both chambers are expected to take extended breaks in August.
No comments:
Post a Comment