Cooper On The Stupak Amendment
Posted on November 9, 2009 at 3:46 pmEzra Klein questions the Congressman:
The argument over Stupak’s amendment was striking for how effectively it evaded questions of choice and focused on the Hyde amendment. They narrowed that debate very sharply.
They won the argument that their amendment was the continuation of current law. It shows how popular the status quo is. That’s the major problem health-care reform has always had. People prefer the devil they know. The default position is usually to do nothing.
But the debate is a continuing education process. Before the Stupak amendment, many of my friends had not realized that the government gives a $250 billion annual subsidy to employer-sponsored health care. If you understand today’s system, the Hyde amendment bans direct subsidies of abortion. It does not ban indirect subsidies of abortion, in particular the $250 billion that goes to employer-based health care. The bishops never noticed that. But this is the way education works in a democracy. It’s not easy or simple. But when people begin making decisions, they learn about lots of things they never noticed before.
It’s the same with procedural things. In the Rules Committee’s explanation of the Stupak amendment, they said flat out that the Stupak amendment codifies the Hyde amendment. Most people didn’t realize that that’s the description from the Stupak amendment’s advocates, not necessarily the judgment of the Rules Committee’s staff. Like many things in Congress, lots of folks did not pay attention to the details. It looked like it just continued current law. But this turned out to be very important.
SEE ALSO: Ilissa Gold ain’t buying it
Comments
2 Responses to “Cooper On The Stupak Amendment”
Is this his reason for voting for the Stupak amendment — or is this his excuse to give us another lecture on how he is the smartest member of congress in the history of the world!! (which I think he is, f-u John Quincy Adams and your multiple languages and worldly education!)
If it is his reason for voting for it, it seems that in short it is “everyone else is really dumb and don’t pay attention in Congress, I decided to be dumb too in order to make them look smarter.”
I think this Klein interview, which is nearly fawning, shows that the national media is giving Cooper a pass. But Ilissa Gold and others locally know better. I agree with Ilissa. Only Cooper would have to spoil his vote, after months of tortuous flirting with voting no, by supporting the abortion ban. Since when is he pro-life?