Search
  • NHDP

ICYMI: Bob Burns Supports “Death Panels”

In 2018, Burns advocated for government-run ‘death panels’ to decide whether or not a woman will be forced to die instead of being allowed to get an abortion


In case you missed it, this morning, the HuffPost published a story about Bob Burns, Republican candidate for Congress in NH-02, and his extreme position on government controlled abortion access.


Burns has made his anti-choice agenda crystal clear throughout his campaign — saying he is 100% pro-life and would support a national abortion ban — but this week, New Hampshire voters were reminded just how far he is willing to go. In a 2018 interview, Burns stated that “we would need a panel” to decide whether or not a woman whose life is at risk due to pregnancy should be allowed an abortion or would be forced to die.


That’s right, Bob Burns does not believe that women should have the right to make health care decisions even when their life is at risk, but he believes that a government “panel” should have that right.


Read the full story here.


Key Excerpts:

  • In an interview on a public access television program with state Sen. Kevin Avard (R), Burns also said he supported exceptions to an abortion ban when the life of the mother is at risk — and proposed that a panel would get to decide whether a pregnant person had a legitimate reason to get an abortion.

  • Burns also weighed in on abortion, saying he’d wanted to see the Supreme Court overturn Roe v. Wade but indicating that he was grudgingly fine with allowing the procedure up to 15 weeks of pregnancy.

  • Here are his comments from 2018:

  • Host: When you say you’re pro-life, what do you mean?

  • Burns: I’m 100% pro-life from conception.

  • Host: OK. How about in the life of the defense of the mother?

  • Burns: The life of the – well, the problem is, when we start using “life of the mother” ― you know, “life of the mother” absolutely has to mean – and I’ve talked about this before – you need a panel to look at it. Not because like, “my life is going to change” or “psychologically, I can’t handle that.” Because this is what they try to put in there.

  • Burns: Absolutely, there’s a few cases where, in fact, it is life or death: a woman comes down with cancer and she can’t get chemotherapy without having an abortion, or what have you. In those cases, I believe we would need a panel in this sort of situation. And we’re getting a little ahead of ourselves. We haven’t totally gained control of the Supreme Court yet, but in those cases, then I would say yes, you know, you’re trading a life for a life. You can’t say that you’re pro-life but one life is worth more than the other life.

  • There are more than a “few cases” where an abortion could help save the life of a mother. And Burns didn’t elaborate on his idea of forming a “panel” to determine whether a woman deserves access to a procedure that could save her life. Who would be on the panel? Who would choose the members? How long would the panel take to deliberate? Would there be any appeal process?

  • “Bob Burns doesn’t think women or their doctors should make health care decisions – instead, he is proposing an actual death panel to decide if a woman’s life should be saved. It’s disgusting and disqualifying,” DCCC spokesman James Singer said.

  • “I’m the only candidate who will protect the right to an abortion,” Kuster says in a 30-second ad that notes her endorsement from Planned Parenthood’s political arm. “I’ll defend our personal freedoms.”