Welcome! We regret to inform you that the Injury Board National News Desk has been discontinued. Feel free to browse around and enjoy our previously published articles, or visit The Injury Blog Network for the latest in personal injury news.

Health Care Reform: Abortion Amendment Added, Boehner Substitute Defeated

Posted by Jane Akre
Saturday, November 07, 2009 10:56 PM EST
Category: Major Medical
Tags: Health Care Reform, Democrats, GOP, Pelosi, Tort Reform, Caps, Uninsured, Insurance, GOP, Dingell, Medical Error, Medical Malpractice

Saturday night and health care reform saw an abortion amendment adopted and a Boehner amendment defeated.

LEARN MORE

IMAGE SOURCE: C-Span

Dems Continue With Vote After Abortion Restriction

Every seat in the House was full just before 10 p.m. closing out debate on health care legislation.

Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) was closing out the debate for the Democrats, fitting since he was present during the last major health care reform in 1965 when Medicare was passed. This morning he brought the same gavel used back then.

Dingell said “Everyone will have peace of mind when they have real access to affordable health insurance when they need it” noting HR 3962 does away with pre-existing conditions.

By 10:05 p.m. - the House broke to consider the Stupak amendment. Introduced by House Democrat Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan, a leader of the anti-abortion forces, it resulted from a deal crafted late Friday night between the White House and representatives of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

House Democrats allowed the vote Saturday to change the abortion provision to permit abortion coverage for people receiving federal aid for their insurance only in the case of rape or incest or when the mother's life is endangered. That change is consistent with a 1970s-era federal law governing public funding of abortion, reports AP.

Elective coverage for abortion would only come when people buy their own private insurance.

But many abortion rights advocates in the House were angry.

There are 190 members of the House who are pro-choice and that move has angered those democrats among them Rep. Rosa Delauro (D-Conn.) who was reportedly furious when this amendment came out calling it the biggest infringement on women’s choice she had ever seen.

"This amendment is government interference in the decision between a woman and her physician," said Rep. Lois Capps, (D-Calif.) "Unnecessary and reprehensible," added Rep. Nita Lowey, D-N.Y.

But Kasie Hunt, a reporter for Congress Daily tells C-Span that Pelosi stood to lose more votes by not allowing Bart Stupak’s amendment.

10:20 – The vote on the Stupak amendment came down yeah 240 and 194 against and was adopted.

Then came vote on the Boehner substitute amendment with by 10:30 did not pass 258-to-176.

Tonight Politico says Nancy Pelosi has the 218 votes she needs to pass health care reform.

By 10:45 p.m. the last chance to change the bill is getting a 15 minute vote then it will go to passage if the Democrats have the 218 votes they need.

10:58 p.m. - Goes to a vote which will take 15 minutes.

H.R. 3962 is the final, merged version of the health care reform legislation that the House has been working on for much of 2009. #


11 Comments

Posted by Patricia Sumner RN BS
Saturday, November 07, 2009 11:33 PM EST

It has never ceased to amaze me that the majority of opponets to women;s right to abortion are MEN.I wish MEN could become pregnant and be left holding the baby. I have seen many women die because of illegal abortions or worse yet have a hysterectomy because they thought they were pregnant and have gone to a butcher and died or became septic and almost died. This was prior to lagalized abortions. Only God can judge these women. We have no right to make moral decisions for another person.

Anonymous User
Posted by Travis
Saturday, November 07, 2009 11:55 PM EST

Its not about to choice whether to end your unborn life. Its about who's paying for it.

Anonymous User
Posted by Chetdude
Sunday, November 08, 2009 12:48 AM EST

Travis...

I'll tell you what...

How about MY tax dollars pay for poor women's abortions and ...

YOUR tax dollars can pay for needless wars...

How's that?

I consider it OBSCENE and unChristian to use MY tax dollars for the f*cking war machine and keep choices away from poor women...

Anonymous User
Posted by Pamula
Sunday, November 08, 2009 12:50 AM EST

It amazes me as to how life can be treated so lightly when it comes to an innocent baby. Most caring mothers would give up their own life for that of their child. If a pregnant mother loses a baby before delivery from an auto accident or from a physical beating, it is considered murder or manslaughter for not one but two lives. Why is it murder then and not when it is an abortion?

I have been in a position of listening to stories of woman who aborted their babies due to terrible circumstances. These women get up daily regretting that decision. They come to realize there were other choices they could have made rather than the termination of an innocent life. It is difficult for them to live with that decision.

Many Americans do not want to be forced to fund or provide support to kill a baby that has no voice. With the proposed government health care reform, there is language that would contribute to this act with our tax money and through insurance premium royalty’s that are realized from the premiums paid by the insured to the medical insurance providers.

We are all accountable for our actions when we contribute to any form of the murder of an innocent baby whether it is the physician performing the abortion, an actual murderer, through support of funding through taxation or choices we make. Often the choices could have been prevented by choosing abstinence. If we are forced into a pregnancy, there are still better choices over termination. Adoption with good counseling for one. Every life has a value and serves a purpose.

Yes, God is the ultimate judge and we should not be guilty of murder because we are forced to provide the means for the termination of life.

Congratulations to congress for voting against forcing Americans to become part of the increased mentality of being co-dependent on being bailed out for poor choices. We should not continue down the same path of entitlement and lack of self-control.

Anonymous User
Posted by Brian
Sunday, November 08, 2009 12:56 AM EST

What I fail to see is how I should personally pay for your abortion Lady. I don't understand why I should have to pay for your health care at all but leave it to a democrat to feel its ok to spend my money for anything. Why not let the Government tell me what to eat and where to live and what to watch. You may not think its like that now but soon enough Lady soon enough you will get all that. The Government now directly controls 42% of the nations economy. That is 8% away from being socialism.

Anonymous User
Posted by Melody Page
Sunday, November 08, 2009 1:16 AM EST

Chetdude how could you possibly know what Christianity is if you feel abortion is ok? Blatant disregard of the Bible's teaching is hypocrisy and I believe there is a speical place in hell for you and anyone else that is a supposed chritian and yet claims to be one. Just think about it.

Anonymous User
Posted by Katherine Thomas
Sunday, November 08, 2009 2:52 PM EST

Not everyone in the U.S. is a Christian, so I find these comments completely offensive. It is up to a woman to decide if she needs or wants an abortion for whatever reasons she chooses. It is not up to a man or men to decide this issue. Our society has a long way to go, and we need many more supporters or women's rights in our society.

Anonymous User
Posted by Roger
Sunday, November 08, 2009 3:04 PM EST

FRIEND OF THE FETUS

(Carole Rose Livingston)
I am no friend to the fathers and mothers
And I am no friend to the sisters and brothers
And I am no friend to the weak and distressed
And I am no friend to the poor and oppressed, but

I'm a friend of the fetus
A friend of incomparable worth
I'm a friend of the fetus
Right up to the moment of birth

Once it's a baby I will not go near it
I will not feed it and I will not rear it
And when it is crying I won't even hear it
For I have no room in my heart for a human, but
Chorus

I will not care for it, I won't be there for it
I will not weep for it, I won't lose sleep for it
I'll back away from it, I won't go gray from it
I will not pray for it, and I won't pay for it, but
Chorus

Anonymous User
Posted by kevin Wickstrom
Sunday, November 08, 2009 3:55 PM EST

a. Its totally a woman's choice and NO ONE ELSES, not even you baby lovers, not everyone feels the same way for a ball of cells as you do. Live in the scientific world and you may have a chance for progress.
b. Im spiritual with roots in christianity, but all you christians out there make me puke with what you have done with the religion.
c.Spending collaborative money to keep each other alive and healthy...and not bring in another human being that will just end up either in a foster home or with a dysfunctional family....HOW HORRIBLE! how bout thinking about someone else less fortunate that yourself, but oh wait you earned your money with hard work and corruption and you deserve to keep all that money for yourself so you can buy useless things to make you feel better about yourself.

Anonymous User
Posted by Marie
Monday, November 09, 2009 12:19 AM EST

‘Posted by Patricia Sumner RN BS
It has never ceased to amaze me that the majority of opponets to women;s right to abortion are MEN.I wish MEN could become pregnant and be left holding the baby. I have seen many women die because of illegal abortions or worse yet have a hysterectomy because they thought they were pregnant and have gone to a butcher and died or became septic and almost died. This was prior to lagalized abortions.’

I am not speaking about well intentioned men who were there to support their partner but much needs to be said for those who left these women in that position. Why was there no support? Where was the man? Ensuring abortion services doesn’t remove the fact that someone got this woman pregnant and then allowed her to put herself in so dangerous a position. Why did this woman have to reach a position where the only way she thought she could survive would be to get herself butchered? That shouldn’t happen in the first place and ensuring abortion does absolutely nothing to prevent that from happening. Yes, it would make the procedure safer and hopefully, she will live and be happy, but the reason she sought an abortion in the first place remains. It is, more often than not, men who will benefit from having abortion so readily available because it ensures that they never have to take responsibility or provide necessary support.

Legalising abortions do nothing to protect women from being abused, it ensures that abusive men never have to step up.

Often enough it is a man who will convince a woman that she shouldn’t have a child. Is that freedom of choice? Or a woman will feel that a child will derail her chance to succeed in her career and thus she is inevitably forced to choose an abortion. Is that freedom of choice? Abortion is simply a bandaid to women’s illusory right to choose and that bandaid will only prevent the underlying issues from being addressed by society.

‘Only God can judge these women. We have no right to make moral decisions for another person.’

The same has to be said for anyone forcing a medical professional to perform a procedure which they themselves are morally against. The bill contained no provisions protecting doctors who are against abortion from being forced to provide one.

‘Friend of the fetus… etc.’
The sad thing is that it’s true that so many people who are against abortion aren't willing to stand up once the child has been born. I agree with everyone who states that that's hypocritical. If we're going to fight for someone’s right to live, we should work to ensure that they're given the chance to live right.

'Posted by kevin Wickstrom Sunday, November 08, 2009 3:55 PM EST a. Its totally a woman's choice and NO ONE ELSES, not even you baby lovers, not everyone feels the same way for a ball of cells as you do. Live in the scientific world and you may have a chance for progress.'

Religious people aren't the only people who disagree with abortion as clearly demonstrated by a lack of consensus between scientists and medical professionals. Many acknowledge that the grey area surrounding when life begins and is worth protecting is reason enough to not risk supporting a practice that may well be the deliberate ending of a living being, tantamount to murder.

'c.Spending collaborative money to keep each other alive and healthy...and not bring in another human being that will just end up either in a foster home or with a dysfunctional family....HOW HORRIBLE!'

This has never been, nor will it ever be, a good enough basis for abortion justification simply based on the fact that there is no guarantee that children born in dysfunctional or downright horrible circumstances are doomed to a life of pain. Many people have survived and made something of themselves after overcoming such adversity and many others have conversely been born in seemingly more ideal conditions and had their lives completely fall to pieces. People don't make anything of themselves without being given a chance and abortion only further ensures that chance is never given. While it is admirable to want to prevent people from being forced into a terrible world or existence, the lack of certainty only means that we could very well be deliberately destroying a lot of people’s chance for happiness.

The argument will arise that I have ignored the needs of the mother and I will state that while I hate the notion of a woman being forced into a life she is not ready to live, I don’t know that that right supersedes any person’s basic right to exist in the first place. Freedom of choice is one thing, but I will never believe that one has the freedom to snuff another person’s right to a basic existence regardless of where that person’s dependence lies or whatever stage in development they are.

Anonymous User
Posted by Scott
Monday, November 09, 2009 3:06 PM EST

The Stupak amendment, to me, taught me how close these "DINO's" should be watched. I was appalled at the inconsistency of these so-called "pro-choice" Democrats voting for such an anti-choice bill. As for Stupak himself, I hope he enjoys getting voted out in 2010. His amendment might not even pass, as Obama himself said he's going to try repealing it.

And to all you close-minded anti-choice people reading this... keep in mind that your cause is meaningless when we go back in time to where women get their abortions out in a back alley. If you don't allow abortion to be a professional practice, then you're just giving it to the black market. Just because you outlaw something doesn't mean it automatically stops. Furthermore, WE do not speak for abortion. We only oppose the criminalization of the desperate.

Comments for this article are closed.

About the National News Desk

Our mission is to seek the complete truth and provide a full and fair account of the events and issues that surround personal safety, accident prevention, and injury recovery.  We are committed to serving the public with honesty and integrity in these efforts.

Hurt in an accident? Contact an Injury Board member

Subscribe to Blog Updates

Enter your email address if you would like to receive email notifications when comments are made on this post.

Email address

Subscribe

RSS Feed

Add the National News Desk to your favorite RSS reader

Add to Google Reader Add to myYahoo Add to myMSN Add to Bloglines Add to Newsgator Add to Netvibes Add to Pageflakes