Washington Post editorial board bashes Lindsey Graham abortion limits bill as 'dangerous' and 'hypocritical'
Washington Post: Graham's press conference riddled with 'falsehoods' and 'nonsense'
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}Sen. Lindsey Graham’s, R-S.C. decision to introduce a bill that would limit abortions after 15 weeks was slammed by the Washington Post editorial board on Wednesday, calling it both "dangerous" and "hypocritical."
The editorial particularly took issue with Graham’s past comments in which he insisted that the Supreme Court’s original ruling on Roe v. Wade was a "power grab" that deprived state and local officials of the ability to dictate their own abortion laws.
"Yet there was Mr. Graham on Tuesday, announcing his desire for Congress to grab the power to set abortion policy from those very local officials," the board wrote.
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}The editorial board described Graham’s press conference announcing the bill as one filled with "falsehoods and nonsense."
SEN. GRAHAM’S FEDERAL ABORTION BILL CONDEMNED AS ‘UNBELIEVABLY CRUEL’ BY NEW YORK TIMES COLUMNIST
The Post knocked Graham’s assertion that the bill would place the U.S. "in line with science and the civilized world," called his "arbitrary" 15-week threshold for abortion "dubious," and stated there was a lack of consensus on when a fetus begins to feel pain.
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}The editorial called Graham’s claim that 47 out of the 50 European countries have similar abortion rules on the books "bogus."
"These societies Mr. Graham apparently considers ‘civilized’ may have strict gestational limits on paper. But in practice, most of their legal regimes governing pregnancy termination are forgiving. Generally, exceptions for things such as economic hardship and fetal abnormalities mean that women can get abortions after top-line time limits pass, so long as they surmount some bureaucratic obstacles," the board wrote.
While Republicans have repeated their position that the Supreme Court’s June ruling creates the opportunity for a "different kind of choice," wherein voters decide abortion laws through their representatives, Graham’s new proposal acts as an "alarming alternative vision," the Post said.
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}MSNBC'S JOY REID CLAIMS LATE-TERM ABORTION IS A 'MADE UP TERM'
The Post also questioned whether Republicans' dismissive responses to Graham's bill would hold out, citing the potential for future pressure "antiabortion crusaders."
"The real test of Republicans’ oft-stated commitment to federalism is only just beginning," the board concluded.
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}Several Republicans, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., quickly distanced themselves from Graham’s bill, restating their position that abortion laws should be left up to states.
On Wednesday, Graham defended his bill, arguing that after 15 weeks doctors should administer anesthesia and save a child’s life. He said this perspective puts the country in line with France, Germany and Great Britain.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
{{#rendered}} {{/rendered}}"I'm proudly pro-life, and I have no apology for being pro-life and there is no bad time to defend the unborn. So if you expect me to sit on the sidelines and watch the Democratic Party try to pass the most radical abortion law in the history of the country, you're talking to the wrong guy," he said.