What People Think
 |
 |
31% For, 69% Against
Take Action
| Vote on this Bill | |
  |
For |
  |
Against |
| Speak Out | |
  |
Comment on this Bill |
  |
Alert Your Friends and Colleagues |
  |
Write Your Representative in Congress |
| Save & Share | |
 |
del.icio.us |
 |
Digg |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Yahoo! |
P.L. 110-204, The Newborn Screening Saves Lives Act of 2007
Revision History 
Below is the revision history of this article.
(Learn how to edit the WashingtonWatch.com wiki.)
(Latest | Earliest)
To look at a past version, click on its date. To compare any two versions, select their radio buttons and click on "Compare Selected Versions." To compare a past version with the current version, click on (cur). To compare a version with the preceding version, click on (last).
Cost per :
Learn More
There was no up-or-down vote in the House.
There was no up-or-down vote in the Senate.
Trackback URL: http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/trackback/110_PL_110-204.html
RSS Feeds for This Bill
Keep yourself updated on user contributions and debates about this bill! (Learn more about RSS.)
Visitor Comments
Michael
Well, the bill passed the Senate. It's onto the House.
I see a lot of people voting against this bill but no comments as to why they are against this bill. I doubt many if any have taken the time to read the proposed bill.
Susan
Every newborn in the US is tested for PKU via a heel stick at birth. This bill simply mandates that 28 other disorders be tested for with the same one heel stick. These disorders are often fatal if not diagnosed early. This bill is vital to the well-being of newborns in the US.
Joel
The problem Susan is, "Without parental consent" and the constitution. Your assertion that this is "Vital to the well-being of new born in the US" is a remarkable assumption.
The fact is, without assertion or assumption, this violates our U.S. Constitution, The Supreme Law of The Land.
This is why many are against the bill that has just become Law. You guys really just don't get the concept of "Freedom" do you?
It's likely you in someway benefit from this either through healthcare or other based on your comments.
Aryaz
What will be done about false positive tests?
Michael
Joel,
How does this violate the Constitution? Which portion of the Constitution? Is this a penumbra's argument?
As for your "don't get the concept of 'Freedom' " argument, A baby receiving a heal-prick to determine if he/she has a catastrophic and deadly genetic disorder is easily a reasonable intrusion into whatever sort of "Constitutional Right" you find within the shadows and mirrors of your argument.
My daughter already has a terminal diagnosis so this bill will not benefit me or my family in the slightest. However, I am pleased to see that more screening is available that may benefit Americans in the future.
NLM
It isn't that they are testing newborns, it is that they are storing their DNA that boths me. Along with the fact that the parents have no say in the matter. No concent is needed. Where are our rights as citizens to have a choice.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Charlie Judd
S. 1858 violates Art.1,9,7. "No money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law..." Congress did not make law requiring DNA samples of newborns. That would violate Congress' authority. S. 1858 provides funding of public money to those entities who do take samples. In addition to violation as above, the bill violates the Separation of Powers Doctrine which is the basis of the Constitution. It is the same for example as China donating money to a presidential candidate.