Inhofe’s own personal beliefs and his constituents’ beliefs share something in common: that abortion should not be permitted, except under extreme circumstances. Since this is true, Inhofe cosponsored this bill as he believed in what the legislation said should be done. Similarly, Sen. Jeff Sessions, has a 100% pro-life voting record according to the National Right to Life Committee and has consistently voted for pro-life legislation and in opposition to taxpayer funding of abortions. Sen. Sessions is so against abortion, that he has called Roe v. Wade, “one of the worse, colossally erroneous Supreme Court decisions of all time,” and led the filibuster of Obama’s first pro-abortion judge, David Hamilton because of his pro-abortion views. His anti-abortion work, allowed him to be named honorary chair of Americans United for Life’s during its 40th anniversary gala (Ertelt, 2015). Just like Sen. Inhofe he come from a very conservative state, and in this case, his state is the most religious state in the United States (Lipka and Wormald, 2015). Like Mr. Inhofe, Sen. Sessions has beliefs against abortion and his state’s conservatism and religiosity prompted him to vote no on this …show more content…
There are many things at play when bills are brought to Congress, things such as interest groups, political and personal ideology, donor contributions, constituencies and states play a role in the way that legislators in both chambers decide to vote on certain bills. Also, the size of the chambers, and the party leadership within them are also crucial to the results. Next time, one criticizes Congress on its passage of bills or lack thereof, it’s important to remember how complex there are and what known consequences they can have to different individuals, that’s why it’s hard for Congress to be as effective as the public would like, because there are simply too many different variables to be aware