LIBERADIO(!)

One question remains...

Eloquently worded below by Goldni is the question for Congressman Jim Cooper that’s on everyone’s lips. So, when you call to thank him today for his “yes” vote on the health insurance reform bill (Nashville Office: 736-5295 DC Office: 202-225-4311), you also might want to ask him,”Why yes on the Stupak Amendment?”

Congressman, I know you’re very smart and have an excellent command of legislative history. I know that you know about the Hyde Amendment of 1976, which forbids federal funding of abortion, and which is the established law in this country. I know you know that there was already a provision in the bill specifically stating that nothing in the bill could be construed as mandating or allowing for federal funding for abortion. I know you know that the Stupak amendment was unnecessary, and that even if you wanted it passed so that a few more people would vote for the final bill, your vote was not needed to make that happen. I know that you know that the whole thing would ultimately be unenforceable and would almost certainly get tangled up in legal challenges. And I know you’re generally not a fan of telling insurance companies what they can or cannot offer.

So why vote to tell them they can’t offer this one thing, especially when 85% of them offer it now with no issues and when it wouldn’t cost the government any money to allow them to continue to do so?

It’s not because you have some great love for fetuses. Your record is mostly pro-choice, but you have never demonstrated that you even particularly care about it all that much as an issue. The budgetary issues are much more salient with you, obviously. But it’s for that reason that I know that your vote for the final bill was not contingent upon this amendment passing. It wouldn’t have mattered to you one way or the other.

Are you trying to build up some “pro-life”* (a ridiculous term, I don’t know of anyone who is anti-life) credentials for your re-election bid next year in the Fifth District? That might work in Lincoln Davis’ district. I personally think that Lincoln Davis is a great representative for his district. But that’s not you anymore, and you need to remember that.

Is there a budget issue in here that I’m missing? This does not amount to taxpayer money going to fund abortion, it would still be private insurance companies offering coverage at their expense, and private individuals purchasing insurance through the exchange would still be using their own money. However, at this time I’d like to renew my objection to the provision in the Senate bill that DOES allow for federal funding for Christian Science prayer treatments.

So, why?

And, might I add, the Stupak Amendment will do absolutely nothing to reduce the number of abortions in the United States. It will, however, take away a potential life-saving treatment for more than half the population of the country. If legislators truly wanted to curtail the number of abortions in the US, they would work on curtailing the number of unintended pregnancies by increasing federal funding for comprehensive, age-appropriate sex education in the classroom and through public and private health agencies.

*We’re all pro-life.

UPDATE from the comments: Ruth Marcus writing in the Washington Post:

Going into Saturday’s debate on the House health-care bill, the measure included provisions designed to maintain the status quo against federal funding for most abortions. It took steps to ensure that federal subsidies to purchase insurance wouldn’t be used to pay for abortion coverage. It required that every exchange include one plan that did not cover abortions, so that no one would be forced to subscribe to a plan that violated anti-abortion beliefs. That wasn’t enough for the anti-abortion crowd, including the Catholic bishops. So House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was backed into a corner, facing the loss of anti-abortion Democrats unless she acceded to an amendment offered by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) that effectively prevents insurance companies participating in the new insurance exchanges from covering abortions. It passed, 240 to 197, with 64 Democrats voting in favor.

Under the Stupak amendment, no plan that accepts people eligible for federal subsidies is permitted to cover abortions. It’s hard to imagine a plan participating in the exchange that refuses to accept people with subsidies, since the vast majority of people in the exchanges will receive subsidies. Therefore, no abortion coverage in the exchange — except to save the life of the mother or in cases of rape or incest. If you are a woman whose health is endangered by a pregnancy, you’ll have to pay for an abortion out of pocket. Same if you are carrying a fetus with severe birth defects.

Stupak supporters argue that women will still be able to obtain abortion coverage by purchasing a separate rider to the policies. As if people plan ahead to have abortions. As if insurance companies will go to the trouble — and risk the controversy — of providing such riders.

According to Cooper’s office, and confirmed by Marcus’s analysis, it was either the Stupak amendment or no passage of the bill. Cooper’s choice is understandable. What’s sad – and what I most hate about this game – is that he was forced to make it.