Pro-Life Dems Win a Big Victory

Thanks, Amy. Are you there in the chamber with Jay covering this? If yes, can you snap a pic of any House rep. who's beet-faced red and screaming for us? It would make a great “1000 words” while KT's off the grid, much obliged! With the R's bluff called, have any Dem. leaders openly said so on the floor / for the record while adding that they'll NOW expect R votes? (putting them in a bind) And from Jay's last post, do either of you have video of Tom Price literally shouting at women on the floor – “bad optics” = good quote from Jay, pics / video, please!

What's pro-life about denying a legal medical procedure to women?
The pro-life lawmakers are the ones working to provide health care for all Americans.

It is sobering.
One cannot help but remember that the same shrill pro-life Democrats and Republicans and especially the neo-cons were the very anti-life crusaders keen on invading Iraq to destroy innocent life ...

Amy, a huge concession? I thought federal law already bands federal funding of abortions. This ammendment seems only to strengthen the federal law that is already on the books. The big news is that the Catholic Bishop Council endsorsed the House' plan thus calming the fears of the Hispanic Caucus. I so dislike the tendency of the press to treat the legislative process as if it was some sort of sports game cliff hanger. Will there be a vote? Will the Democrats stick together? There wouldn't be a vote schedule if the bill was not going to pass nor would President Obama be on the HIll today. This whole narrative writing of MSM is old. Every reporter trying to be John Grishom is tacky. Just give me the who, what, when, how and if you are smart enough the why.

[...] Swampland A blog about politics. Swampland Feed   Daily E-mail Updates   « PreviousPro-Life Dems Win a Big Victory [...]

The Republican caucus continues to have pro-abortion or pro-choice members, notably Rep. Mike Castle of Delaware.

Ms. Sullivan writes that the Democrats' reported “deal” on abortion “calls the bluff of many Republicans and conservatives who held up abortion coverage as their main reason for opposing health reform.” That claim does not reflect any reporting or analysis of any fact, but is another invention from Ms. Sullivan's mind. I have followed the Democrats' attempt to control health care and its financing closely. I read conservative news sites, including the Washington Times, the Examiner, the editorial page section of The Wall Street Journal, National Review, The Weekly Standard, and the American Spectator, listen to Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham, and listen to and watch Sean Hannity and the massively underrated Glenn Beck. I have read the op-eds of Betsy McCaughey. Nothing from what conservatives say and write even remotely supports Ms. Sullivan's fanciful imagining.

I have listened to elected Republicans discuss the Democrats' health care schemes. I have read the Facebook postings of Gov. Sarah Palin. (Claims that her reference to “death panels” reflected solely a concern with end-of-life care or directly on HR 3200's language falsified what she wrote. She used a metonymy, as evidenced by her inclusion of her son, Trig, who would “stand before” a “death panel,” singular in her first and most cited effort. No way would Wasilla have a “death panel.” She had in mind the writings of Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel and fully expected that this Administration would move to take any large writ of authority and use it to short care for the elderly, the mentally deficient, and other people seen as not pulling their oars in society. The Associated Press and other journalists falsified the statement of a strong opponent of the left's agenda. The falsehoods likely reflected pressures on their judgment from intensely held ideologies and prejudices.)

The National Right to Life Committee emphasizes the dangers in the Democrat plot to force such as this writer to support not only some persons' abortions, but also the infrastructure to provide them, e.g., expect even more money to be funneled to Planned Parenthood. As an issue organization, one expects the NRLC to concentrate on that one topic.

But any conservative of whatever type finds many reasons to oppose this monstrous move to further the left's rule of American society. An abortion piece of fakery may satisfy the Catholic bishops, whose news service tilts left, but not anyone who takes the time to examine what the Democrats are attempting to do. I will provide two of many, many reasons to oppose this instance of horrendous timing, in the midst of a severe recession. (Perhaps that is not bad. Since the Democrats have no clue as to what when wrong or what to do right, any focus of theirs on the economy likely would only create more harm.)

I know an internist in a northeastern state who quit her practice because malpractice insurance premiums had risen so high that she could no longer stay in practice. Antibusiness and anti-private enterprise Democrats like the President rail against physicians and insurance companies, but the blame for large malpractice premiums lies with an out-of-control tort system. And the Democrats will do nothing to offend the special interests that fund them, especially the tort bar. (Heard a tort ad on TV lately? I hear lots of them.) A “reform” that does not address irrational tort payments is no reform at all.

I could not get an H1N1 shot this week because I am older than 64. I am 75 and have several heart defects. My chance of surviving the flu is low; my chance of getting a flu shot in a condition of scarcity is also low. The elderly are in for a rough time in coming years, if the Democrats extend their domination of society.

If this rotten piece of legislation crashes and burns, Ms. Sullivan does not “see how” that could put Republicans in a “sympathetic” position. Is she serious? Yes, lefties like the nutroots will go ballistic. However, defeating this historic attempt to harm the provision of medical care would make the Republicans and sensible Democrats heroes to many Americans.

Reforms and changes ought to be made in our system. Exclusions of pre-existing conditions ought to be remedied through risk pooling, e.g., auto insurance, or through government subsidies, to name one. Most Americans, who are happy with the status quo, will accept reforms like that. They will back making health insurance available across state lines. My sympathies lie with the good guys; my contempt goes to the baddies, Obama-Pelosi-Reid-Waxman-Stern and their allies and followers.

Let's see: coastal "elites", check; blacks, check; Hispanics, check; women who think they're smart enough not to have their reproductive choices decided by men, check. At this rate, the only people who will be willing to call themselves Republicans will be southern white men. Oh, wait...

Pro-Life really does mean dedicated to taking a matter of conscience out of the hands of individuals through any means possible.

buzzworthy,

Most private insurance don't cover abortion unless if it's rape, incest or the life of the mother is in jeoporady. When the federal law banning federal funds for abortions passed, Most insurance companies followed suit. They just love dropping coverage on things. But you can claim an abortion on your tax return as an out of pocket medical expense. If you want coverage for abortions you would have to buy the so called cadillac plan type of coverage. Also for some reason, most unions still have abortion coverage under their healthcare plan. So no the Supak amemendment doesn't have huge ramification. Reporters should research before uttering nonense. This amendement is just an ideological fight between Progressive Dems and the Blue Dogs. Progressive had hope to lessen the constraints of the federal ban.

stupak: A medical condition (subset of sepsis) resulting from unsafe - unnecessarily so - back alley abortions as a result of the "Stupak Amendment" to the 2009 Health Care Reform Bill.

Doctor: Unfortunately, while this would have been covered under private insurance carriers, public plans were barred from including women's health measures. I'm sorry, you'll have to see "Dr. Julio" in the alley behind 7-11.