Dianne Pratt’s letter tells only part of the story (Herald, Aug. 27). She lists several laws on which Paul Ryan has voted for or against to support her position. I appreciate her listing the laws, as I was able to Google all of them and get the complete facts.

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964 stating that the 180-day statute of limitations for filing a lawsuit regarding pay discrimination resets with each new discriminatory paycheck. By removing the statute of limitations, a retiring employee can seek damages against a company now led by executives who had nothing to do with the initial act of discrimination.

HR 221 is actually HR 212. Paul Ryan was a co-sponsor along with 63 other members of Congress. In its current form, it does not state what, if anything, would be outlawed, and definitely does not criminalize abortion “for any reason including saving the mother’s life,” as Pratt wrote.

HR 358 is described as a Ryan supported bill that allows federally funded hospitals “to refuse to perform abortions, even if a woman would die without it.”

What HR 358 actually says is substantially different. It would prevent any federal funds from being used for abortions. It would revise that section of Obamacare that allows federal funds to be used for abortions. The law states: “No funds may be used to pay for any abortion or to cover any part of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion, except: (A) if the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest; or (B) in the case where a pregnant female suffers from a physical disorder, physical injury or physical illness that would, as certified by a physician, place the female in danger of death unless an abortion is performed, including life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself.” In addition, the law states that separate coverage may be purchased to cover abortions as long as premiums are paid by nonfederal funds.

Jim Reynolds

Durango