TPMDC

Key Dem Senators Say Stupak Abortion Amendment Goes Too Far

Spread the word. Share this article on Facebook!

Share

Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT), Senator Harry Reid (D-NV), Senator Max Baucus (D-MT)

Share

Twitter Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

A number of high-profile senators have come forward today to say that a controversial amendment to House health care legislation that would limit a woman's right to purchase insurance that covers abortions goes too far and should not be a part of the Senate.

At a Capitol Hill event this morning, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid implied that the Stupak amendment exceeds the strictures of the years-old Hyde amendment which prohibits federal funds from financing abortions. "I expect that the bill that will be brought to the floor will ensure..no federal contribution to abortion, and that [the] rights of providers, health care facilities like Catholic hospitals, are protected," Reid said. "The one thing that we're certain to do is to maintain what we have had in the past. I had the good fortune, as did Senator Durbin to serve with Henry Hyde, the Hyde amendment has been a pretty good way to go through this last couple of decades."

Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD) was more explicit. At a health care event this morning, Cardin said, "The right policy is to avoid coming down on one side or the other on the abortion issue and to handle health care reform as a separate issue."

He went on, "I think that the Stupak amendment does not do that. The Stupak amendment tries to advance a particular view and I think it's regrettable and I would certainly prefer a bill that does not include the Stupak amendment."

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT)--two pro-choice legislators with different public postures on the issue of abortion--both agree that adding Stupak-like language to the Senate bill will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, due to a likely 60-vote threshold.

But Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) told TPMDC yesterday that if at the end of the day the Senate health care bill does not include restrictive language along the lines of the Stupak amendment, he will join a filibuster to kill it.

Comments (8) | Join the Conversation!

Recommend Recommend (0)

November 10, 2009 1:46 PM   

Fuck Ben Nelson. Call his shit. Let him kill health care because it doesn't fuck over half the population -- and the majority of those without health care. Let that be his legacy. Fuck him.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

rwc

user-pic

November 10, 2009 5:04 PM    in reply to Mike Drew

Except it will scew us and the rest of the nation.

It's looking increasingly hopeless. Either a bill that is so compromised to get the votes of Lieberman, Nelson, et all, will pass and do so little to help the majority of people, that they will take it out on the Dems, or nothing will pass and the public will also take it out on the Dems.

God, how I wish we had some real political choices, like they do in Europe.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 10, 2009 1:57 PM   

I'd trade Olympia Snowe for Ben Nelsdon any day. I'd trade her for Ben Nelson and Joe Lieberman, some to that.

Your new Democratic Party: Billions for the bankster boys but not one dime for abortions, even if it's your own money!

Obama received 59% of the women's vote. Millions of women have voted Dem for over 30 years to protect reproductive rights. If an overqwhelmingly Dem Congress throws us over, I say screw them all.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 10, 2009 1:59 PM    in reply to Mimi katz

Yours are the key reasons I think that won't happen. I'm hoping Stupak's amendment is the only thing that is DOA in the Senate.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 10, 2009 2:04 PM    in reply to Dorn76

I suspect one of the reasons the House leadership let it in is that they knew they could always strip it out in conference.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 10, 2009 2:21 PM    in reply to mans_best_friend

but won't they need the same "gained votes from the amendment" for what comes out of conference?

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

rwc

user-pic

November 10, 2009 5:08 PM    in reply to Indie Pro

Yes they will. This country is so screwed. There is no real progressive party here. I think we are far more likely to go the way of Argentina in the '70s than we are to join the European mainstream.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

November 10, 2009 3:51 PM   

The key here is when the Nelson-Casey thing pops up.

If Reid slips in into the Merged Bill, then it will take 60 votes to get it out. That won't happen. On the other hand, it would be an interesting process to get it into the merged bill: it was part of the HELP or FiCom bills. Which would suggest it needs to go to the floor.*

If it only comes in via the floor, it would present an interesting bit of gamesmanship. How many people who eventually vote "no" on the amendment would join enough to get to 60 for cloture? There are several GOPers (Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, Olympia Snowe and Kay Bailey Hutchison) who have Pro Choice backgrounds. Would they break party ranks on Cloture only to fall back on voting "no" in the final vote on the amendment? Bayh is is a little wishy-washy on Abortion despite his high NARAL rating. He also probably is looking for any posion he can add to the Healthcare bill, so might play games here. Same with Lying Lieb: vote for cloture there, while not voting for cloture elsewhere.

So that's the whipping that needs to be done: not just 41 "against the bill", but 41 "against cloture".

* worth noting that is likely how a "Trigger" version of the PO would need to happen, since it wasn't part of either HELP or FiCom. But someone could clarify that.

John

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