Evan Bayh's really on top of things

Here's an E-mail I received today:

June 9, 2005



Dear XXXXX:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the case of
Theresa (Terri) Schiavo. I appreciate hearing your thoughts and understand the seriousness of your concerns.

As you know, Terri Schiavo suffered severe brain
damage as a result of a heart attack in 1990. Since that time, she was under constant care in nursing homes and a hospice and, until a court order which took effect on March 18, 2005, was fed and hydrated by tubes. A series of court decisions found that Mrs. Schiavo was in a permanent or persistent vegetative state, that her husband was her legal guardian, and that he had the right to make decisions regarding her care. The Florida courts determined that Mrs. Schiavo would not have wanted to receive artificial life-sustaining treatment.

On March 20, 2005, the Senate passed by voice vote a
bill to allow the federal courts to review the Schiavo case, to be absolutely certain that the due process of all involved was upheld. This bill passed the House of Representatives and was signed into law by the President on March 21, 2005. A Federal District Court, a Federal Appellate Court, and the United States Supreme Court refused to order that the feeding tube be reinserted.

This case has raised extraordinarily difficult questions. I have given it a great deal of thought and, while I remain troubled by anyone's impulse to abandon life, I cannot pretend to understand what it is to live in a persistent vegetative state, or to understand the pain and anguish felt by those told their loved one is in such a condition, with no chance of improvement.
Hopefully, future research will eliminate the need or desire to withdraw life-sustaining care in these types of situations. Until then, however, the courts and legislative bodies that address this issue must adequately balance the right of citizens to control their own fate with the responsibility of our government to protect those same citizens and ensure sufficient due process when individuals are incapable of making decisions about their health care.

Certainly, individuals can do their part to avoid such tragic disputes, guide their loved ones, and ensure their wishes are fulfilled, by completing advance care directives and living wills. You may be interested to know, I am a cosponsor of S. 347, the Advance Directives Improvement and Education Act of 2005. Among other provisions, this legislation would provide for Medicare coverage of end-of-life planning consultations and establish a national public education campaign to raise awareness of the importance of planning for care near the end of
life.

Again, thank you for contacting me. I hope the information I have provided is helpful. My website, http://bayh.senate.gov, can provide additional details about legislation and state projects, and you can also sign-up to receive my monthly e-newsletter, The Bayh Bulletin, by clicking on the
link at the top of my homepage. I value your input and hope
you will continue to keep me informed of the issues important to you.

Best wishes,





Evan Bayh
United States Senator

EB/mc

Sincerely,

Evan Bayh


Keith’s Barbeque Central

and I still don't know where he stands......


am I missing something?

Hillary seems a lot more popular than anybody else at this point. And if we nominate a Midwestern senator, it should be Russ Feingld, who is actually a Democrat and has a spine.

tends to be nonhoosiers who feel this way about Bayh. Not exclusively, mind you...

I feel the same way about Bayh. He is a lightweight that has no clue to the issues.

In which case, would he please get the Senator to reply to my e-mail (submitted through his website) in which I begged him to join Rep. Conyers in holding Bush accountable for the charges raised in the Downing Street Memo?

I don't like Iban Baught either.
"He Belongs to PHARMA now..."

Notice the date, that is all


Keith’s Barbeque Central

letters sent to Bayh and Lugar - the ones from Lugar generally get a quicker response - and one that intelligently addresses the issues. Too bad he always tucks tail and votes with bushco. While letters from Bayh are late in response and so generic as they don't always seem to address the issue that was raised in the first place. At least he *sometimes* votes against bushco

Waits until the controversy has passed then sends a wishy-washy, non-committal letter outlining his lack of position.

Just what the party needs in '08.

I wrote him at the height of the Schiavo thing & I get a response today. What a crock of shit!!!

On edit: It's a non response.


Keith’s Barbeque Central

Dem convention tomorrow night.....

I've even LESS enthusiastic about seeing him after reading this letter.

Copy this if you can & ask him about it. We both know what the problems are with it.


Keith’s Barbeque Central

for his speech....but I'll copy it just in case.

just a conservative democrat fence-sitter. I'm very unimpressed, especially with his vote for the bankruptcy bill.

his record on women's right to choose is strong. He's about 50-50 on so many things but then I think of the alternative--there is no alternative in this case. So what do you do?

Remember that as Governor he signed the bill requiring women seeking abortions to view pictures of aborted fetuses.

Knowing full well that this POS would not have put his born-with-a-silver-spoon-in-the-mouth daughters such an ordeal were they to have an unwanted pregnancy.

I just looked at his voting record and he scored pretty high in the area.... well higher than Lugar anyway. Like I said, he's all we've got right now.

and I can't find any evidence of this assertion.

What I did find was the Informed Consent Act which was signed in the 90s. To my knowledge, it requires doctors to inform patients that pictures can be provided, but doesn't actually require showing the pictures to patients.

Indiana's Informed Consent Act is under new fire with the recent addition that patients should be informed that they can have an ultrasound and listen to a heartbeat. But, again, no mention of being forced to do so.

There's a big difference, imho, between a law requiring doctors to inform patients of these options, and a law forcing doctors to force these options on their patients. I can find no evidence that Hoosier patients are forced, let alone evidence that Bayh signed such a law.

If anyone can point to a link that states otherwise, I'd appreciate it.

Social Security privatization. He said SS needed help, but he was against privatization. Bayh isn't as progressive of a Democrat as I would like, but he beats someone registered as Republican, in my book.