« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Abortion May Kill ObamaCare

By: Brian Darling (Diary)  |  March 4th, 2010 at 10:01 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

The abortion issue may take down ObamaCare, even if Congress pulls the Health Care Nuclear Option in a desperate attempt to pass the bill.  Congressman Bart Stupak (D-MI) declared yesterday that “several Democrats who voted for it the House would oppose it next time around” without removing pro-abortion language in the Senate passed ObamaCare bill.  This is a big problem for the proponents of ObamaCare, because under the special rules of the reconciliation process, ObamaCare can’t be fixed. 

Even if the Democrats attempted to insert a ban on the federal funding of abortion in the reconciliation measure, that would cause both procedural and vote counting problems in the Senate.  For all the talk yesterday from the President about this being the time to vote on ObamaCare, an unresolved abortion controversy makes prospects for passage doubtful. 

The AP reports:

A congressman who has played a key role in the long-running health care debate says he and 11 other Democrats will vote against the overhaul unless a provision subsidizing abortion is removed.  Rep. Bart Stupak argued Thursday that the provision in the Senate-passed version has language that would permit the federal government to “directly subsidize abortions.”

ObamaCare passed the House by a 5 vote margin and the Senate passed a different version on a party line vote.  There is no margin for error and a switch of 10 members of the House from Yea to Nay is curtains for ObamaCare this year.  It is clear that if the abortion issue is not addressed, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has a big, potentially unresolvable, strategic problem to get this bill passed.

The ObamaCare Nuclear Option has two elements.  Passage of the Senate passed bill in the House with language that allows for the federal funding of abortion.  Then the House shall pass a “reconciliation sidecar” bill to amend ObamaCare in a manner that insures final passage in the House and Senate.  The plan is for the Senate to pass the reconciliation measure then the President signs both ObamaCare and the ObamaCare reconciliation measure.  This scenario breaks down early in the process if not enough House members will vote for ObamaCare.  If it does not forbid the federal funding of abortion, then Speaker Pelosi may not have enough support in her caucus to complete the strategy.

Using reconciliation as a means to make changes to the Senate passed ObamaCare bill is a problem.  The rules are strict and one rule in particular may make the Health Care Nuclear Option a failed strategy.  Senator Robert Byrd (D-WVa.) passed a rule years ago that said anything that does not score or is incidental to the budget purposes is out of order on a reconciliation bill.  Abortion language would seem to be subject to that rule and specifically has been ruled out of order during the 1995 reconciliation bill. 

Robert Dove, former Senate Parliamentarian in 1995 told MSNBC that there was a prior ruling of the Senate that abortion language is out of order on a reconciliation bill.  Dove said the following:

In 1995 they had a very large reconciliation bill and there was a provision that was in that bill which provided that no federal funds could be used for abortion.  It was my view that it violated the Byrd rule even thought it did score.  It would have saved the federal government money.  But part of the Byrd rule is that if something is in there not for its budgetary effect, but for its policy effect that invokes something called the incidental test and it can be thrown out. 

If the Democrats want to violate the rules of reconciliation and attempt to put a ban on the federal funding of abortion in the reconciliation measure, they will have two problems.  First, they may not have the votes to pass ObamaCare in the Senate with a ban of federal funding of abortion. 

Also, the Vice President, as President of the Senate, would have to toss aside the rules of the Senate, and the precedent cited by Bob Dove, to include abortion language that is incidental to ObamaCare.  As I wrote in Red State last week:

Robert Dove, former Senate Parliamentarian told MSNBC that “it is the decision of the Vice President whether or not to play a role.”  The “Byrd Rule” forbids matters that are incidental to the reconciliation process.  That rule could be set aside by the Vice President.  All the Democrats would need is a simple majority to sustain the ruling of the Vice President when challenged by a point of order.  If the Vice President has the will to issue friendly rulings, he can make Parliamentarian irrelevant.

This abortion issue may be the Archilles heel of ObamaCare and may be impossible to resolve.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • Maureenthetemp

    Correct me if I am wrong, but if the House passes the Senate bill — THE SENATE BILL IS PASSED. Other than Pelosi’s promise to hold it and not send it over to the White House for signature, why can’t Obama just sign the Senate bill? Reconciliation is basically a different bill, what is to stop the Dems from saying “Oh, it’s too bad we couldn’t pass the fix, but the American people want this right now, we’ll try to fix it later.”

    • Brian Darling

      It seems to be possible that Obama will sign the Senate version of ObamaCare if they can’t get reconcilation measure passed. The problem is that pro-life Dems may deny them passage of either measure under that scenario.

    • jsbrodhead

      If the House bill could pass the Senate as-is (or run back through the House with Stupak intact), then seems you are correct.
      BUT Reid didn’t even try. He had to write his own (or SEIU’s own…)

      Ironic that “abortion” might be the wooden stake, which kills Obamadinejad-care. 50 million previously muted voices, might just get some representation, even though it is very little in comparison to the price they paid.

      http://micahpeak.org/Personhood.aspx
      http://micahpeak.org/Proposal103109.aspx

  • Dan McLaughlin

    It’s your petard, folks. Hoist away.

  • conservative_faction

    Am I correct in my assumption that this is essentially a bill killer because in order for the house to pass the senate bill, it has to be passed “as is”, with the abortion language left in current form? They can’t modify the Senate bill in any way, shape, or form?

    • KeepOhioRed

      then it has to go back to Senate to be passed there, which will require 60 votes to overcome the GOP filibuster, which they don’t have.

      That’s why they have to pass the Senate bill “as is”. If they could, they would have already done it, and Obozo would have signed it.

      • conservative_faction

        I just wanted to make sure that I am understanding things correctly.

  • AndrewHyman
  • sertelt

    Ironically it could be pro-life Democrats who kill the bill. Stupak and his 12 are firmly opposed – http://www.lifenews.com/nat6070.html

    And Pelosi may not have the numbers to pass it – http://www.lifenews.com/nat6067.html

  • Leopard1996

    These scumbags play the game by by what they think the rules should be to accomodate them. Stupak, I think honestly believes that you can change these things now on the senate bill, but I think he will cave just enough if told that it’s too damn bad but it’s either health care reform through going this way or nothing.

  • http://www.neoavatara.com/blog neoavatara

    Stupak is fighting against everyone…if he didn’t believe in his fight, he wouldn’t be so public.

    And reconciliation is a TERRIBLE way to resolve the abortion issue. It should not meet many of the criteria for the Byrd rule.

    http://neoavatara.com/blog/?p=10154

  • bk

    52 Dems + Collins + Snowe voted against the Nelson/Hatch amendment that was equivalent to Stupak. 7 Dems joined the 38 other Republicans in voting for it.

    Ref: http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/08/health.care/index.html

    Even if it fell under reconciliation rules (if there is such a thing as reconciliation rules any more), the Senate is NOT going to vote that language in.

    • bk

      He said that maybe this can get added back in in reconciliation as a budget issue since fewer federal dollars would get spent on abortion as a result. But Bob! Madame Pelosi just told us that zero federal dollars could be spent on abortion under the Senate bill, so Stupak wasn’t needed! Are you saying she was lying at the summit?

      Then he said it shouldn’t be a problem because some nays were changing to ayes for House members who liked the Senate bill better and especially for ones who are retiring and don’t have to worry about the political consequences. Translation: It’s easier to ignore the will of the people if you aren’t running in the election it would have cost you.

      He also mentioned it’s easier because 216 are needed instead of 218 because of vacancies. That’s a stupid argument, because I believe one or two of those vacancies are people who voted aye the first time around, correct?

  • 10ksnooker

    There were a few Democrats who still stuck to their principles. Sheesh, could have fooled me, after the judgeship was promised to a brother for a vote in the House.

    How is that impeachment list coming.

  • Spartan4Life

    They are by their very definition compromised individuals.

    I will take any and all bets that they won’t fold. They will.

  • tngal

    (Actually its the next deadline seeing as how they blew through a few already)

    Press Sec. Robert Gibbs was pushed on a deadline today and per thehill.com

    “the White House hopes to see the House approve the healthcare bill by March 18, the first day of the NCAA college basketball tournament and just before President Barack Obama leaves the country on an international trip.”

    That’s 14 days from now. Lotsa arm twisting can be done.

    That’s just the house part, but if pro lifers can hold them back,and a couple more scandals, or immediate retirements take place this might get pushed out there even further. Of course they’d love to have the whole thing done by Easter

    • marinevet03

      the NCAA college basketball tournament is being used as a deadline?

      • tngal

        who knows. I just pulled it from the hill. And like you I thought it was odd that gibbs would mention it. But the good news is O’s leaving the country right after that limiting the damage he does here at home.

  • Composer_Man

    I have the sense that while the pro-life objectors are serious, the more important role they are playing is to give cover to the other Dems who are not interested in voting on this bill at all.

    What I mean is that Bart Stupak and the others have put themselves out there, they have held a strong line (at least rhetorically) and they have some credibility when it comes to this matter. The mere fact that other Dems see that 10 or 12 pro-life folks are ready to torpedo the whole thing gives them cover to tell the Wicked Witch of San Fran that there’s no point in giving their vote when the pro-lifers are dooming the bill anyway.

    In the end, we may never know what the vote count would have been, because I suspect Nan is not going to schedule a vote she can’t win. (OTOH, maybe she will, just so everybody’s on record and the Dems can eat their own.)

    All I know for sure is that my heart can’t take much more of this. I want this bill DEAD, DEAD, DEAD, DEAD!!!!!

    • IJB

      …So they don’t have to publicly commit to a ‘No’ vote, and anger San Fran Nan. (Grijalva’s move against this from the Left may be a similar kind of play…)

      Regardless, there’s no question that they’ve *lost* “Yes” votes, and turned not a single “No”-vote into a “Yes”-vote, regardless of whatever Bob Beckel is prattling on about…

  • john_barry

    Obama will give $11 Billion Extra from Taxpayers to fund abortion in new Healthcare Bill. Abortion agencies helped bankroll his presidential campaign. Its pay back time at the expense of the American taxpayer and the innocent unborn child. Visit Stop The Abortion Mandate at http://stoptheabortionmandate.com/
    Call and e-mail your Representative to clearly say: ?NO Abortion in Health Care!? Get their contact info online at: http://stoptheabortionmandate.com/representatives.This Bill is a Crime against humanity. It must be stopped.

  • john_barry

    Representatives may be contacted at:
    http://stoptheabortionmandate.com/representatives

  • http://www.voteforteri2010.com teridavisnewman

    There’s no reconciliation required in this pig of a health care bill. If the House passes it, it goes directly to Obama for signature and becomes law as soon as he signs it. They are trying to pull the proverbial wool over the eyes of Congress and (HOPEFULLY) it’s not going to fly. If Pelosi had the votes to pass it, it would be sitting on Obama’s desk for signature. The American people have GOT to keep the pressure on their so-called “Representatives” who have gotten into the habit of ignoring us over the past few decades and are going to keep doing so until they are sent a message in November that they will NOT be able to ignore.

  • danielbdp

    Unless we ALL get behind Stupak and his band of Courageous Principled Democrats and thank them profusely for taking the heat since November, and also warn them they will get kicked out of office in November if bought off / confused into signing the Senate bill (yes, there absolutely won’t be any reconciliation; Obama will sign immediately, declare victory and move on to pushing cap & trade or some other disastrous measure. Has to uphold his perfect record of keeping no promises after all…besides the House, and soon the Senate, will expendable in November…) . In his delusionary egotistic mode, our president believes he and his many czars can rule us dumb sheep like benevolent marxists.

    And unless we all call our Congress “representatives” and read them the Riot Act daily (it’s back to November in Congress…). Particularly those potential flip-floppers Mr. O invited to his private meetings yesterday afternoon…

    http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/0310/making_his_case_a4fe715b-f422-4943-b3dd-1f6c654c5e94.html

    The first meeting, at 1:30 p.m. in the Roosevelt Room, was expected to be with Madeleine Bordallo, Donna Christensen, Danny Davis, Raul Grijalva, Mike Honda, Dennis Kucinich, Barbara Lee, Lucille Roybal-Allard, Jan Schakowsky, Nydia Velazquez and Lynn Woolsey.

    A second meeting, at 2:30 p.m. in the Oval Office, would be with the leadership of the New Democrat Coalition. Expected to attend are Jason Altmire, Melissa Bean, Lois Capps, Joseph Crowley, Ron Kind, Allyson Schwartz, Adam Smith.

    Obama was also expected to meet with Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) in the Oval Office at 4:15 p.m.

    Thanks John Barry for the Stop The Abortion Mandate info:

    Obama will give $11 Billion Extra from Taxpayers to fund abortion in new Healthcare Bill. Abortion agencies helped bankroll his presidential campaign. Its pay back time at the expense of the American taxpayer and the innocent unborn child. Visit Stop The Abortion Mandate at http://stoptheabortionmandate.com/
    Call and e-mail your Representative to clearly say: ?NO Abortion in Health Care!? Get their contact info online at: http://stoptheabortionmandate.com/representatives

    I agree with John: This Bill is a Crime Against All Humanity, since it will destroy the economy along with accelerating the destruction of the unborn. It absolutely must be stopped.

  • JadedByPolitics

    the Senate to proceed because of the possibility of “free” healthcare for the masses “if” they can work out “language” in the House, is not the Church wealthy enough to take care of the poor instead of weighting down ALL Americans to pay for someone else?

    This really makes me angry

    “?We would strongly urge everyone, Democratic and Republican, to vote to waive the point of order,? Richard Doerflinger, an associate director of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, told POLITICO. ?Whether it would be enough to get to 60 votes, I can?t predict. We would certainly try.?

  • leehazel

    Whether or not (a) version of Obamacare is passed of not it is effectively dead now. The Abortion issue and the Cost is at the base of this.

    The American people have made it very clear that they want no part of this
    bill(s). All of the lying in the world by “The One”, or his minions or his lapdog MSM, is going to resurrect it.

    Even if something is passed (I really doubt if this can happen if tax funded abortion on demand is anywhere to be found in the bill) and signed by the President elections are coming only a few months behind.

    Any politician that does not understand what is the current mood of We The People doesn’t deserve his/her job in any event. There are going to be a lot of new/fresh faces in WDC.

    As a final note, if this congress passes a bill that contains areas that are effectively off limits for future amendment or reversal by future congress’ hopefully the new congress will put us squarely into a full blown constitutional crises. Other than Sunshine Laws I’m just not sure that the sitting congress can stipulate future Congress’ actions either positively of negatively. There has got to be a huge Constitutional question here. What I am referring to here is that there is a clause in the (so called) Death Panel part of the Senate bill that stipulates that this clause can only be changed or deleted by a vote of a “Super Majority” (60%) of the Senate.

    PC is Thought Control
    LEE