The Stupak Amendment

EJ Dionne counsels Dems to get over the Stupak Amendment which bars the use of Federal funds to subsidize insurance policies that cover abortion:

From the outraged comments of the abortion-rights movement, you'd think that Rep. Bart Stupak's amendment to the House version of the health-care bill would all but overturn Roe v. Wade.

No, it wouldn't. The Michigan Democrat's measure -- passed 240 to 194, with 64 Democrats voting yes -- would prohibit abortion coverage in the public option and bar any federal subsidies for plans that included abortion purchased on the new insurance exchanges.

Stupak argues that the federal government has stayed out of the business of financing abortion since passage of the Hyde Amendment in 1976 and that none of the policies available on the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program covers elective abortion. The structures that reform would create, he says, should carry the same restrictions, which do not apply in cases involving rape or incest or when a mother's life is in danger.

After reviewing the history of the Hyde Amendment and the Stupak interpretation, as well as possible compromises, we get this Big Finish:

The truth is that even with the Stupak restrictions, health-care reform would leave millions of Americans far better off than they are now -- including millions of women. This skirmish over abortion cannot be allowed to destroy the opportunity to extend coverage to 35 million Americans. Killing health-care reform would be bad for choice -- and very bad for the right to life.

They told me that if McCain were elected women would lose access to abortion - and they were right!

Comments

[soccer dad]

Shouldn't that be "They told me that if I voted for McCain ...?"

[Karl Marx]

The dialectical contradictions within the Democratic Party and their media enablers, would in a logical world, make their heads explode.

[MarkJ]

Definition of an E. J. Dionne Democrat:

Somebody who holds two diametrically opposing views on the same subject...and believe in neither of them.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

I missed it. McCain was elected?

[narciso]

Only in the 'bearded Spock' universe, Charlie

[Diane Winkler]

Once again people are trying to say what is black is white. AKA Obamaspeech and democratspeech. The abortion amendment would prevent federal funds used for abortions - per the Hyde amendment-Not stop abortions! If the original wording stays in the bill, then the bill is violating the law - the Hyde Amdmt. Those who want an abortion now, have to find their own funds. If the amendment is allowed, those who want an abortion would have to continue to find their own funds. NO DIFFERENCE.
I don't understand why the Rep did not vote "present" and allow the amendment to fail. There were some Demos that would not have voted for the HC Bill if the amendment was not included. The Reps could possibly have gotten more "no" votes and the bill could have failed. They needed to look at the bigger picture - the HC bill, not abortion. I'm prolife and I would not have voted for the amendment.

[Porchlight]

Diane,

I sympathize with your view, but I think that the bill would have passed even if the amendment failed. Stupak said all he wanted was an up-or-down vote on the amendment, and if he got that - regardless of of the outcome - he would deliver his Blue Dogs to Nancy for the yes vote on the final bill.

Causing the amendment to fail would also have opened up the GOP to (legitimate, in my view) charges that they were "playing politics with life."

Here's a good analysis from John McCormack at the Weekly Standard:
Killing the Stupak Amendment Wouldn't Have Killed the Bill

[BelieveWatUwant]

Back at the old abortion debate. The same old horse that refuses to leave the barn. And, it's quite a fund raiser for pro-life groups! Unless you thought two cases, designed to knock Roe down in the 1980's, didn't get Roe affirmed, with Sandra Day O'Connor, I believe writing those two opinions.

Well, we're back. Because republicans like carrying all their eggs in one basket. And, they discount where the nation stands, astride the 50/50 line. And, how around the globe, these days, women have access to abortions. And, even in rural 3rd world nations, if you add TV to the household, the birth rate falls down. Tell me China and India aren't interested in shrinking family size? But this bloody argument rules one side of the political debate. Not the other. As if you can change people's behaviors by fiat. (Hint: Prohibition didn't work. But it did make Joe Kennedy rich.)

[Jane]

I'm pretty sick of the abortion issue too. I don't want the government to pay for it, but Roe is not going away. And still democrats AND republicans run on it every single election.

[Buford Gooch]

There is a fundamental problem in attitudes about abortion. Some see it as a choice by the mother, and can go either way on it. Others see it as murder, and could no more be in favor of allowing it than they could be in favor of a mother killing her unwanted two year old child. Trying to convince someone who believes that it's murder that he or she shou8ld just "compromise" is a useless endeavor.

[Karl Marx]

more Washington Kabuki....

[Porchlight]

And, it's quite a fund raiser for pro-life groups!

It's a huge fund-raiser on both sides. Let's at least be honest.

I'm pro-life. But I understand people's frustration with the way this tends to play out in Washington. And I agree that Stupak is largely kabuki - at least, that's how it looks right now.

But I'll say one thing: if Stupak ends up being the only thing in the end that can kill this bill....well, I hope the pro-choice folks who are anti-Obamacare can at least agree that's a pretty good thing.

[MayBee]

I'm pretty sick of the abortion issue too. I don't want the government to pay for it, but Roe is not going away. And still democrats AND republicans run on it every single election.

It's obviously better financially for groups like NARAL and Emily's list if the Stupak amendment stays in the bill.

[hit and run]

MayBee:
It's obviously better financially for groups like NARAL and Emily's list if the Stupak amendment stays in the bill.

How much money do these groups raise each year,and how many abortions could those funds cover?

[BR]

Decent people naturally live in harmony with each other and nature.

Below that, there are the haters, hypochondriacs, eco nuts, bullies, wimps and perverts who join degraded groups and political parties, and pass laws to restrain themselves, it seems.

I'm sick of 'em! Clogging up the free flow of life.

[Gregory Koster]

Jane, both parties are satisfied with the present system of imbecililty, which kicks almost all the action into the judicial branch. Let the judges get screamed at; they can't be canned at the polls. A conflict that would dwarf any domestic imbroglio short of the Civil War would erupt if the Supreme said, to hell with it, we declare abortion a "political question" and kick it back to the people's branch i.e. Congress.

[Jane]

How much money do these groups raise each year,and how many abortions could those funds cover?

(I hope I am not being repetitive)

In 2001 we had a special election for Congress - which actually took place on 9/11. About 6 weeks before I had dinner with a friend who was in the state senate and asked her why she wasn't running. She told me she couldn't possibly win.

A week later she announced for the seat in a crowded field that had been running for quite a long time at that point. I saw her shortly after and asked her why she got in. "Emily's list gave me $1,000,000.00 to run" was the answer.

Now IMO it was Emily's list that lost the election for her. She was one of the most savvy campaigners I've ever known. 12 years before in her initial run she unseated the senate minority leader. He was so unaware that he had left for Florida on election night and had to turn around his private plane mid trip to concede. She was a spectacular candidate whenever she ran. But when she had to spend every day talking about "choice" - which apparently was the talking point, (despite the fact it wasn't and would never be an issue in a MA election) she just sounded foolish. It took away all her natural ability on the stump. She lost to a pro-life dem candidate (Steven Lynch) an unheard of phenomena in this state.

[BR]

Vaccine alert: H1N1 Swine Flu Vaccine Causes Miscarriages.

[Ari Tai]

And since private insurers will continue to pay for abortions, this puts the left in an interesting place. If they support a public option leading to single-payer - there will be no abortion funding. Without (or a failing) public option, the majority will continue to have 3rd parties pay for abortion on demand.