TPMDC

DeGette: Study Confirms Radical Implications Of Stupak Amendment

Spread the word. Share this article on Facebook!

Share

Rep. Diana DeGette (D-CO)

Share

Twitter Facebook Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

I just spoke with Rep. Diana DeGette (D-CO), co-chair of the Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus, who insisted that the findings of a new George Washington University study confirm many of her suspicions about the Stupak abortion amendment.

"Certainly if it doesn't confirm my suspicions about the intent, it concerns my suspicions about the effect the Stupak amendment would have," DeGette said. "What the findings show are that women who want to purchase policies with their own money--with their own premiums--will not be able to buy insurance policies.... That's frankly the intention of the anti-choice movement now."

DeGette says she's spoken in private to many of the pro-life Democrats who voted for the Stupak amendment, some of whom have acknowledged that they didn't realize what they were voting for.

"I will say that I have spoken privately with several pro-life members about the Stupak amendment, and they acknowledged that the Stupak amendment goes far beyond where they thought it did," she told me.

For this and other reasons, she believes that everything will be resolved, despite Stupak's continued insistence that health care reform won't pass if his amendment is stripped.

"I think this bill still has a long way to go, and I will tell you that by the time the bill gets to the conference report, I think cooler heads will prevail."

Join the Conversation!

4 comments

Recommend Recommend (0)

November 18, 2009 2:46 PM   

Anything goes, as long as Obama can create an appearance of the only president who finally managed to "reform" health care.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 18, 2009 3:33 PM    in reply to Lalo35adm

But keep in mind inaction on the health care morass is the public's enemy, at 17% of GDP and pretty bad results compared to a large number of other countries, and a drag on conducting business competing with other countries. Laws, once enacted, can be challenged and changed. And if the initial reform bill ends up causing more problems than it solves, Obama's legacy will not have kudos, but blame. In any case, the ball got rolling. I really don't buy it's all about Obama's reputation, he's taking as much risk on that front as anyone else. I'm prepared for some really bad effects as well as some really good ones, it is bound to be doing it through a democratic process. The main thing is: it's going to be a process, and painful at times, no one is going to get glory. That's why it's been so hard getting anyone to start it.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 18, 2009 3:51 PM    in reply to artappraiser

All good points, but I look at Obama's actions regarding DOMA and I'm sorry but "laws, once enacted, can be challenged and changed" suddenly has a very different ring to it.

It's hard to write and pass a good law. It's so much harder to repeal a bad one.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 19, 2009 8:58 AM   

arithmetic. Coverage WITH abortion costs less than coverage without (that can be historically verified), so that women should be able to sign up for abortion coverage at no additional cost (because the expected additional net medical cost is $0), but in an insurance pool separate from the other insurance pool. This "dual pool" model provides free abortion coverage but also means that pro-lifers need not worry that their tax/premium dollars are funding abortion.

The entire proposal can be found at Think Outside Of the Box, www.thinkOOB.com

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Leave a comment

Your response:

Follow us!

Most Popular

TPM Stories Now Surging on