During her recent interview with Superstar Oprah Winfrey, former GOP VP Candidate and Alaska Governor Sarah Palin revealed her perspective on the issue of Abortion. Do I agree with her? Yes I do. At one time in my life I was a Single Mother also faced with the option of Abortion. Choosing to have my two sons years ago when faced with that decision, leaves me with no regrets today.
While delivering his last Health Care Reform speech before Congress on Sept. 9, 2009, Pres. Obama promised American Voters there would be No Federal Funding for Abortions included in the bill. Have Democrats forgotten this promise?
Stupak: Health Care Bill Will Stall if White House Strips Abortion Restrictions
The author of a controversial amendment restricting federal funding for abortion coverage on Tuesday predicted that health care reform legislation would stall if the White House tries to step in and strip it out.
Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., dismissed a claim by White House Senior Adviser David Axelrod that President Obama would intervene to change the language, saying Axelrod is clueless on the issue and that such an intervention would imperil the bill.
"They're not going to take it out. If they do, health care will not move forward," Stupak told Fox News. "We won fair and square. ... That's why Mr. Axelrod's not a legislator. He doesn't really know what he's talking about."
The abortion amendment was tacked on to the House health care bill and was a key factor in securing the votes of moderate Democrats before the bill was approved by a narrow margin earlier this month. The amendment went beyond preventing the proposed government-run plan from covering abortion to restricting federal subsidies from being used for private plans that offer abortion coverage.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said Tuesday that the language "raised a comfort level with many members." The bill passed by a narrow margin even after the abortion language was added. Hoyer offered no predictions for its fate in the Senate and beyond.
"We'll have to see how that is handled in the Senate and then in the conference," Hoyer said.
The passage drew recriminations from abortion rights supporters like Planned Parenthood, which called on the White House and Democratic lawmakers to reverse the measure. Axelrod answered the call in an interview Sunday, saying the amendment changes the "status quo," something the president cannot abide.
"The president has said repeatedly, and he said in his speech to Congress, that he doesn't believe that this bill should change the status quo as it relates to the issue of abortion," Axelrod said. "This shouldn't be a debate about abortion. And he's going to work with Senate and the House to try and ensure that at the end of the day, the status quo is not changed ... I believe that there are discussions ongoing to how to adjust it accordingly."
Axelrod told CNN's "State of the Union" that the president believes that issue, as well as the ongoing dispute over what kind of government-run insurance plan, if any, should be included in the overhaul, "can and will be worked through before it reaches his desk."
The president also said last week that he did not support the amendment.
But Stupak said the bill would have a difficult time getting through the Senate without such restrictions, and said that if it bounces back to the House without the amendment, the administration could lose "at least 10 to 15 to 20" votes.
"The majority has spoken. Most people agree -- do not use public funds for abortion," he said. "You're not going to summarily start dismissing amendments which the majority of the House of Representatives wanted because some person, David Axelrod or someone, doesn't like it."
McCaskill: Senate Could Live With Stupak Amendment
Sen. Claire McCaskill, a pro-choice Democrat from Missouri, said on Monday that she didn't think a provision greatly restricting the ability of woman to access or pay for abortions would be enough to kill a Senate health care bill
Appearing on MSNBC's "Morning Joe", McCaskill was asked whether an amendment added by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) to the House's legislation would be too bitter a pill to pass the Senate.
"I am not sure that it is," replied the Missouri Democrat. "Obviously, I have been a pro-choice candidate for my entire political career, and obviously there is controversy always surrounding this issue. But we are talking about whether or not people that get public money can buy an insurance policy that has a coverage for abortion. And that is not the majority of America. The majority of America is not going to be getting subsidies from the government...."
"And so, I am not sure that this is going to be enough to kill the bill," McCaskill added. "And frankly, once again, this is another example of having to govern with moderates. We can't just turn our back on the fact that the reason we are in majority, is because states like Indiana, and Arkansas, and Louisiana, and Missouri, and North Carolina, and Virginia sent Democrats to the Senate."
One of just 13 female Democrats in the Senate, McCaskill's willingness to support a Senate version of the Stupak amendment could go a long way to determining whether it is added to the final product. Already on Monday there is ample indication that it will be considered. Leadership aides, for one, are not tamping down reports that a handful of conservative Democrats are preparing to introduce legislation that would mirror Stupak's. As one noted, the two committees that produced health care legislation each considered amendments that either explicitly or practically achieved what Stupak's did. Finance had the Hatch Amendment that required women to buy supplemental abortion coverage while HELP had multiple amendments.
The language seems likely to be considered once again. As The New York Time's reported: "some Senate Democrats, including Bob Casey of Pennsylvania and Ben Nelson of Nebraska, are pushing to incorporate the same restrictions in their own bill. Senior Senate Democratic aides said the outcome was too close to call."
If, indeed, the Stupak language makes it into the Senate bill, it would be a major blow to pro-choice advocates. It would also seemingly ensure that the restrictions on abortion access would survive conference committee with the House and end up in the final piece of legislation. If that is the case it sets up a major showdown, once again, in the people's chamber. Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), for one, has insisted she and 40 additional colleagues will oppose any final bill that includes the Stupak amendment.
"There's going to be a firestorm here," DeGette told The Washington Post. "Women are going to realize that a Democratic-controlled House has passed legislation that would prohibit women paying for abortions with their own funds. . . . We're not going to let this into law."
View Larger Map
Sources: NY Times, Huffington Post, The Hill, White House.gov, Fox News, HELP, The Daily Beast, Wikipedia, Google Maps
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment