Don’t Be Stupak
Posted on November 9, 2009 at 8:42 amIlissa Gold on Rep. Jim Cooper’s support for the Stupak amendment to the health care reform bill which ban abortions from being covered in anyway under the new system:
Congressman, I know you’re very smart and have an excellent command of legislative history. I know that you know about the Hyde Amendment of 1976, which forbids federal funding of abortion, and which is the established law in this country. I know you know that there was already a provision in the bill specifically stating that nothing in the bill could be construed as mandating or allowing for federal funding for abortion. I know you know that the Stupak amendment was unnecessary, and that even if you wanted it passed so that a few more people would vote for the final bill, your vote was not needed to make that happen. I know that you know that the whole thing would ultimately be unenforceable and would almost certainly get tangled up in legal challenges. And I know you’re generally not a fan of telling insurance companies what they can or cannot offer.
So why vote to tell them they can’t offer this one thing, especially when 85% of them offer it now with no issues and when it wouldn’t cost the government any money to allow them to continue to do so?
It’s not because you have some great love for fetuses. Your record is mostly pro-choice, but you have never demonstrated that you even particularly care about it all that much as an issue. The budgetary issues are much more salient with you, obviously. But it’s for that reason that I know that your vote for the final bill was not contingent upon this amendment passing. It wouldn’t have mattered to you one way or the other.
Comments
7 Responses to “Don’t Be Stupak”
Ms. Gold is blinded by her own opinions. First of all, NARAL is incorrect. There are no firm numbers of insurance companies that provide elective abortions but most estimates place it at a small minority.
We can argue labels all day long. I do not regard “pro choice” as an accurate term since the one who has the most to lose in this matter, the developing child, has no choice.
From a practical standpoint, adoption of the Stupak amendment resulted in the final bill’s passage. If needed, Pelosi could have rounded up a few more votes from the Dems who went the other way.
I oppose the provision in the Senate bill that allows funding for “religious or spiritual treatments” added in to allow for coverage of Christian Science prayer treatments. I oppose my tax dollars going to that. Where’s my amendment?
Goldnl..
Yep.. At least when someone choses faith healing they are only harming themselves if it does not work.
But Abortion on the other hand, kills human life.
Actually Pro-Life Dem, you’re right about the numbers being inaccurate–it’s actually a higher estimate, 87%. The “small minority” claim comes from the fact that only a small percentage of abortions are directly billed to insurance companies. Many women choose to receive reimbursement directly from the insurance company, for confidentiality reasons.
http://www.guttmacher.org/media/inthenews/2009/07/22/index.html
And TNVol, if everything else about this bill is socialist, then why wouldn’t it also be socialist to tell insurance companies that they cannot cover something they already do?
There’s another issue here too–if a fetus dies in utero but the woman has not yet miscarried, insurance companies may not have to cover the D & C to get it out. Medically, it’s considered an abortion either way.
http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2009/11/09/will-stupak-amendment-force-women-whove-miscarried-lose-insurance-coverage-i-think-so
So Pro-Life Dem and TNVol, do you think that if a fetus is already dead, the woman should still be forced to wait until she miscarries?
Goldnl They are not telling them they cannot cover abortion.
The GOP amendment was to give them the Choice to cover it or not.
You know where I can choose a plan that does not covera abortion and you can.
It teh GOP bill did prevent the Government Option from Covering abortion.
But soon abortion will be no more anyway. 53% of the people oppose abortion. which has grown in the last decade from 42%..
Goldnl.
So Pro-Life Dem and TNVol, do you think that if a fetus is already dead, the woman should still be forced to wait until she miscarries?
There is a difference in a spontanious abortion (misscarriage) and a medical abortion.
if you cannot tell the difference, I cannot help you.
TNVol, I can tell the difference. But medically, removing a dead fetus involves the same procedure as a later-term abortion. Medically, the insurance companies would still be billed for a D&C. And this amendment does not change the definition in any way.