« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

The Abortion Gambit: Stupak’s Folly

“The Democrats can give all the cover they want to Stupak, but the Senate GOP will show the cover to be the fig leaf it is.”

Credit where it is due: the Senate GOP has come up with a great strategy to combat talk of compromise on reconciliation. The Senate GOP will block any effort to strip abortion funding in reconciliation.

This may get a few pro-life groups upset and I want to be very clear here — you will be able to tell the real pro-life groups from the posers by their stand on this strategy. The real pro-life groups will support this and the posers will oppose it.

Here’s why.

Right now in the House, Bart Stupak is trying to get the Democrats to put language in the reconciliation package to the Senate health care plan that would prohibit abortion funding.

If the Democrats do go along with Stupak and thereby get enough votes from pro-life Democrats to pass Obamacare, the Senate GOP is going to object to the abortion language.

Republican Senators plan to raise a budget point of order, a procedural move objecting to the reconciliation process that requires 60 votes to defeat.

“If there is anyone left in the House who believes Senate Republicans will help carry their water on abortion or anything else so they can vote in favor of the health bill, they are radically misreading our Conference,” a senior Republican Senate aide said Tuesday. “Republicans intend to raise every point of order and will not waive a single one regardless of merit to assist Democrats in passing this $2.5 trillion health care boondoggle.”

This means Stupak and his pro-life Democrats in the House cannot for Obamacare because it is GUARANTEED to fund abortions. There is no way out of it. The Senate GOP is making it very clear.

A vote for Obamacare is a vote for funding abortions. Period. The Democrats can give all the cover they want to Stupak, but the Senate GOP will show the cover to be the fig leaf it is.

Real pro-life groups get this. They know that Obamacare poses an across the board danger to the cause of life. Passing Obamacare even with the Stupak compromise would still allow, in the NRLC’s language, “federal facilitation of direct killing.

The groups posing as pro-life groups will wring their hands of this strategy and otherwise lend support to the passing of legislation that would promote “federal facilitation of direct killing.”

COMMENTS

  • mbecker908
  • joshgosser

    Finally there seems to be a strategy in the Senate. Making a conference report impossible and this are great moves.

  • DavidSage

    Finally, the GOP is playing hardball.

    I firmly believe that social conservatives will see the big-picture of what Republicans are doing by blocking this route.

    If the government takes over health-care, there will eventually be publicly funded abortions. Period. The best way to prevent this is to kill ObamaCare by any means possible.

  • JSobieski

    Which is why the time frame he talks about is the “end of year”. He has also dismissed the possibility of side-bar letters and legislation and said that it needs to be “one bill”.

    Stupak’s folly (I assume he is sincere) is in thinking that the Senate is capable of passing a fresh bill given that the Reconciliation option wouldn’t be available at that point.

    http://abclocal.go.com/wjrt/video?id=7319806&pid=7319043

    http://abclocal.go.com/wjrt/video?id=7320350

  • stigmo

    In practice, I worry that the Stupak 12 are going to use this as cover to go ahead and vote for the bill like they wanted to all along (“We were ready to strip abortion funding, and the big, bad GOP stopped us”). I suspect they could pretty easily blame this on the Republicans.

    The GOP seems to be definitely going all in. Should we take this to mean that this vote does indeed hinge on Stupak and friends?

  • throwback59

    House passes the Senate bill? If it does, can’t Obama just sign the already passed bill, without reconcilliation?
    The dems can vote for the bill and blame Republicans for not removing abortion funding.

  • http://beaglescout.wordpress.com Beaglescout

    Obama would simply sign the Senate version and go on his merry way, then tell Stupak or others to create a new bill with their modifications to Obamacare in it.

  • WarEagle01

    JSobieski, I get your point but I just can’t see Stupak voting for the Senate bill in exchange some vague promise of making the Hyde amendment permanent months down the road. In Stupak’s words: ?[W]hy would I do it now after all the crap I?ve been through?? Hot Air has an article on Stupak’s latest comments.

  • jdp

    Republicans are the ones who block an effort to strip abortion funding from the health care bill. I’m sure that’ll go over well with the voters. As far as I’m concerned, you’ve been wrong at every turn so far on the abortion issue in health care reform and I think you’re wrong now, too.

    Why not we forget the Republicans because, as much as you might be loathe to admit it, Republicans have absolutely nothing to say about what’s going to happen now. Nothing. They can bitch, they can stonewall, they can posture all they want, but if the Dems want to pass this thing it will pass. Let’s come alongside the Dems who are trying to fight the bill, shall we. Like Bart Stupak and his group. Instead we’re looking for ways to “paint them into a corner?” I just don’t understand that, frankly.

  • JSobieski

    That;s what I gather from his recent townhall and local TV interveiw.

  • bk

    To say “ooh we’ll accept this part” means that they admit process is valid. They have to fight everything to do with it.

  • stigmo

    All that matters is plausible deniability. i.e. “I wanted to strip abortion funding in reconciliation, but it’s not my fault that never happened.”

  • JSobieski

    a play out the clock approach seems better to me than the Republicans going on the record and saying that they would vote against Stupak language in the Senate.

    The dems are destroying themselves as it is—–giving them a common boogy man at this point may not be the best idea.

    Reconciliation is just a head fake for the stupid, and there is every indication that the Stupak 12 seek a fresh bill from Obama. I say that giving Stupak et al the continued ability to say “we are in favor of health care reform” makes it more likely that the Senate bill dies and the dems devour themselves in arguing about starting over, even more extreme procedural schemes, or just out and out cannibalism.

  • Menlo

    Diana DeGette (D-CO) said she had 40 House Democrats who would vote against any bill with his amendment.

    For much the same reason as the senate, I don’t expect the House Republicans would sign on either.

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

    This is what it will take. No matter what it is, we should oppose every step they take. If they want this, they are going to have to burn up a lot of political capital, and we should make them pay for it.

    http://neoavatara.com/blog/?p=10270

  • redneck_hippie

    from reconciliation (or whatever the insane decide to name it) bill does make it more a question of starting over or stopping for the time being. In that Stupak may be leaning that way also, I say go for it.

  • houstoneagle

    Grrrrrr why can’t it be a Republican senator, loud and proud? Or at least on background.

    I’ll start celebrating when it’s more than just an anonymous aide.

    Thanks for pushing the discussion, though, Erick.

  • redneck_hippie

    And the artillery bombardment is just getting going. Concomittent headlines bombarding the cities of Debt, Deficit, CBO scoring, CBO estimates of bankruptcy of Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, we’ll be Greece in 20 years at our current rate of deficits. Day after day, the awareness of the stink of HCR is exacerbated by the carpet bombing headlines about the coming bankruptcy of America.

  • JSobieski

    and the House knows it

  • hexan

    Let’s assume Stupak gives his vote for ObamaCare on the promise of a fix in reconciliation. Republicans (or the parliamentarian) defeat the fix. We loses right?

    Nope. He goes back to his supporters as the jilted lover. He tried, Pelosi lied.

    In 9 months, Republicans take back the House and gain seats in the Senate.

    Republicans (and a handful of pro-life Democrats) amend a must-pass bill with language to de-fund abortions and the President signs it unceremoniously.

    Obama gets his win. Stupak gets his win knowing that Republicans will never tolerate federally funded abortions.

    He’ll vote for the bill. It’s a no lose proposition for him. However, it’s smart to posture strongly to get the best deal.

  • thurman

    In terms of sheer Machiavellianism, I always protested the R’s should not have helped the Stupak language in the House bill

    They were the ones who let it pass, which IMHO was the only reason the House HCR bill could get to 218

    Maybe they thought putting Stupak’s language in it would eventually kill the bill, as it appears may (hopefully) still happen?

    I hope they hold firm on this for the reasons outlined above– I was worried they’d get trapped into voting for it and actually ease any reconciliation process along

    The HotAir article today on Stupak’s newest statements gives me a little more hope at least
    http://hotair.com/archives/2010/03/09/stupak-i-havent-caved-on-obamacare-and-i-wont-agree-to-a-future-abortion-bill/

    And from a recent excellent analysis in Politico, it pretty much lays out that both sides are pretty convinced there is no way to get an abortion fix through reconciliation anyway, it would have to be a whole new bill needing 60 in the Senate
    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34104.html

    I’m starting to agree this is all kabuki to give cover from the nutroots before the let the bill whimper and die

  • YankeeConservative

    Thats what those nutcase liberals said about the first house bill … before they got rolled …

  • cwilson

    The Stupak 12 want to pretend that they can pass the current Senate bill, which funds abortion — but escape blame because they will rely on the reconciliation bill to “fix” it.

    However, reconciliation cannot be used to change policy, only adjust numbers in budgetary bills. (And no, it’s not as simple as “well, adjust the number for “how many dollars will pay for abortion” to “zero”).

    Now, we all know that there will BE no reconciliation. Once the House passes the Senate bill, Obama will sign it, and that’s the last legislative action on healthcare until the republican takeover in Jan 2011. But the Stupak 12 plan to “defend” themselves by saying “Well, the Senate PROMISED they would take that abortion funding out, so THAT’s why I voted for it. It’s not MY fault the Senate lied to me!”

    The Senate Republicans are giving notice to the House Dems that they will NOT be able to rely on this fig leaf. The reconcilation bill — as if one would ever actually come to the floor — will NOT have the Stupak language in it. They will not be able to use this excuse.

    So they either live up to their “pro-life” principles, or vote for federal abortion funding right there out in front of God and everybody.

    It’s called playing hardball, and keeping the pressure on these wavering Dems so that they — these Dems — DON’T want this thing to pass, because without their fig leaf, the electoral damage these “pro-life” dems will do to themselves is much greater.

    You’re right that the R’s can’t stop it. Gentle persuasion of the Dems can’t stop it, not with Nancy, Obama, and Reid out their playing by Chicago rules. So, the R’s are using a more…effective…means of persuading these Dems to vote no.

  • bigmaude

    I remember that Saturday I wasted emailing my friends and calling my Reps office about abortion and the Stupak amandment and after the thing passed I remember feeling so stupid because of the fact you stated. We would have had a Very Merry Christmas if on that November day, on a Saturday we would have said no, no, no!
    I am STILL amazed that we are debating whether or not we should kill our children and who should pay for it. God help us

  • eburke
  • eburke
  • eburke

    saying “We ain’t gonna bail you out and, when the impossible doesn’t happen, give you cover to say ‘Well, we tried’”

  • eburke

    that they will object to *any* abortion language in the never-to-see-the Senate-floor reconciliation bill, the Pubs are pulling the rug out from under the “We tried but we just couldn’t do it” excuse for the pro-life Dems. The ads in the fall election campaign write themselves at that point.

  • eburke

    an anti-federal funding abortion bill right after he submits his first balanced budget.

  • jsbrodhead

    Yesterday, I received tweets about how “Obama gives Planned Parenthood (PP) 10 million dollars”.

    This government-gone-FERAL IS already funding murder of America’s children, through EVERY DOLLAR (i.e. $5XX MILLION in the last two years to PP)

    The Supreme Court of the United States needs to reverse the evil decision of 1973, which has “legalized” the SLAUGHTER of upwards of FIFTY MILLION HUMAN BEINGS.

    http://www.MicahPeak.org

  • http://www.voteforteri2010.com teridavisnewman

    Very few people have an understanding of how insurance companies work. Theoretically there are ?uninsured? people in the USA, but in actuality, everyone?s health care is paid for or the hospitals would have to close their doors! The very poor have Medicaid which is the government health insurance and the illegal aliens use it by having an anchor baby who is a US citizen at birth. The baby is then used to qualify for welfare benefits and Medicaid and it is automatically granted to underage US citizens. The illegal aliens along with those who choose not to buy health insurance are covered by what is known as ?cost shifting?.

    Cost shifting is the process by which hospital bill the insurance of covered people for the cost of their care AND THE CARE OF THE UNINSURED. Do you really think that two aspirin cost the hospital $30 to provide? Of course not!! The $30 pays for the aspirin and the care of the uninsured. The hospitals shift the cost of the care of the uninsured onto the bills of those of us who DO have insurance?if they didn?t do this, they would have to close their doors since they are legally required to provide care for any sick person or emergency. NO ONE in America is denied health care because of inability to pay because they either have Medicaid, health insurance or the cost of the care is shifted to the insured. It?s been going on forever and worst of all, the illegal aliens know that they cannot be denied care in an EMERGENCY ROOM so they use ERs as their primary physician which is horrendously expensive. Hospitals routinely deny that they are shifting the cost to the insured people, but they are. Just from a business standpoint, they MUST in order to remain open and provide care?and Medicaid is also billed through cost shifting.

    To bring down costs, we need to change the incentives that govern spending:
    * Right now, $5 out of every $6 of health-care spending is paid for by someone other than the person receiving care — insurance companies, employers, or the government.
    * Individuals are insulated from the reality of what their decisions cost.
    * This breeds overutilization of low-value health care and runaway spending.

    To reduce the growth of costs, individuals must take greater responsibility for their health care, and health insurers and health care providers must face the competitive forces of the market. Three policy changes will go a long way to achieving these objectives:
    * Eliminate the tax code’s bias that favors health insurance over out-of-pocket spending.
    * Remove state-government barriers to purchasing and providing health services.
    * Reform medical malpractice laws.

  • dtroitpunk

    I was just talking to my wife about this the other day! Yes teher are some issues that can be a deal breaker for me when voting. I personally can NOT vote for someone who takes a Pro-Abortion (sorry! pro-CHOICE) or an ant-gun postion.

    That being said some groups like the SBA have been encouraging us to contact our representatives and tell them that ANY health care reform must be voted down if it doesn’t have the Stupak wording in it…..

    Even as a Pro-Lifer, I know this is wrong…It shouldn’t be voted for no matter WHAT!!!

    The current “reform” package is a liberty and economy killing powergrab. The lives that may be lost (through abortion expansion and denial of services to the aged or terminally ill) are the literal killings that can be added to the figurative ones.