Political Hotsheet
July 22, 2009 4:35 PM

Dem Says Abortion Language a Must in Health Care Bill




Democratic Rep. Bart Stupak said he is "optimistic" that his campaign to include explicit language comndemning the use of federal funds for abortion in the House health care bill will pass the House Energy and Commerce Committee. The congressman from Michigan did however say on today's "Washington Unplugged" that the House will likley not vote on the bill before their July 31st deadline.

"I think if they do not have [the language] in there and President Obama says we are going to have a bill with nothing in there on abortion, I think it is going to backfire. I think we bring down the rule and it will be explicitly discussed in the health care plan one way or another," Stupak told Washington Unplugged's Michelle Levi after a press conference with Republican collegues on Capitol Hill Wednesday.

Stupak told CBS News that he feels confident that "a minimum of thirty nine" democrats would join him in opposing the legislation proposed by House leaders should the abortion language not be written in.

"If there is not direct language and we are denied our ammendment we will focus our attention on the rule," Stupak warned.

"I am optimistic that we will get an ammendment," in the House Energy and Commerce committee which has recessed their mark up of the health care bill in question, the congressman said. However, should the bill leave the committee without banning the use of federal money for abortions Stupak and his collegues will "demand" a house floor vote on the specific issue.

In an interview with "CBS Evening News" anchor Katie Couric yesterday, President Barack Obama said he did not want to "wade into" the issue of whether or not health care reform should include federal funding for abortions.

"You can't talk about health care and reproductive rights and what you are discussing reproduction policy and coverage in health care," Stupak said of President Obama's statement. "You cannot not talk about it. It is central to all of the things we have been doing," he said. (Read more about the issue and the interview here).

Stupak admitted that the president is probably using "good political judgement to try to avoid" the issue of abortion coverage in the health care debate "but you can't."

"The president was elected to make tough decisions, just as I was elected to make tough decisions," Stupak said. "These are tough decisions, you don't run from them."

Asked if he thinks the health care bill will be brough to a vote in the House before their summer recess, a deadline set by President Obama, Stupak said he does not think the deadline will be met.

You can watch the whole interview above on today's "Washington Unplugged," along with an interview with a roundtable discussion on the arrest of Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr.
Tags:
Bart Stupak ,
Washington Unplugged ,
Michelle Levi
Topics:
Washington Unplugged
Share:
  • Share
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Mixx
Add a Comment
by skyk-2009 July 22, 2009 6:28 PM EDT
I continue to find the Hypocracy of the Right to be breath taking. It's OKAY for Tax Payers like myself, who find the American Taliban to be very offensive, to provide TAX FREE income to that group but will fight to the death to deny a Woman access to a LEGAL Surgical Procedure. I guess it's a matter of who's Ox is being gored!
Reply to this comment
by Aldymac July 23, 2009 9:41 AM EDT
In what way are churchs being funded by the government?
by TheStolenGiraffe July 22, 2009 6:28 PM EDT
abortion should not be covered under any gov't health insurance plan. it should remain a procedure paid for out of the pockets of those seeking one. besides, it's a pretty inexpensive out-patient procedure anyway.

birth control pills should definitely be covered, because it will help curb both the amount of abortions and the amount of teenage pregnancies is this nation. besides, if viagra can be covered, then why can't birth control.
Reply to this comment
by taxedmore July 22, 2009 6:03 PM EDT
Why should my hard earned tax money go to pay for somebody else's sex. Wouldn't that make the government a pimp? If somebody wants an abortion, fine, they can pay for it. If they can't pay for it, they have the option of keeping their legs together.
Reply to this comment
by Solarrays247 July 22, 2009 6:26 PM EDT
I'm not saying that you should have to pay for somebody else's sex. Not once did I say that this is the right approach, did I? I want to let you in on something....you are already paying for Viagra, either through health insurance premiums or through taxes...whether you like it or not! You are already paying for a man to have sex!

I am aware that most of us are working hard, trying to make a good life...and that keeps most of us very, very busy! But, just try to think things through here. On one hand, we are paying for a man to have sex...with what? A wash cloth? Why should we even be paying for this? Because its a medical condition? Hmmmm, so is pregnancy!!!

What do you propose? Demand that Viagra not be covered if birth control pills are not? Would this make more sense? I don't know...hence my first post. I want to know what our so-called lawmakers think about this. They already let us know what they think about abortion!
by skyk-2009 July 22, 2009 6:30 PM EDT
Why should MY hard earned money go to some Church? IF you are going to force your Religion on me then keep your BELIEFS to yourself. Abortion is LEGAL in this nation and isn't going to be otherwise in the future. Time to get used to that fact.
by Solarrays247 July 22, 2009 6:02 PM EDT
Regarding reproductive rights, I would like to ask Rep. Stupak, as well as all members of the Senate and Congress, what are their opinions regarding the fact that many private health insurers continue to reimburse the insured for Viagra, but not for birth control pills.

Why should men be able to get drugs so they can have sex, but women cannot be given the same access to needed drugs so they can have sex safely and without the risk of becoming pregnant? Do men somehow have more of a right to sex than women, as implied by the unequal coverage of these drugs? And has this issue been covered under health care reform?

I am not trying to be a smart a$$, just searching for ways that would enable the need for abortions to become rare. Abstinence, of course, has proven to be an abysmal failure!
Reply to this comment
by Illuminated1 July 22, 2009 6:32 PM EDT
Viagra is used to fix a real physical reproductive problem, which is abused to have better sex by some.
Birth control pills are used to prevent responsibility.
Birth control is as easy as not spreading your legs.

"Abstinence, of course, has proven to be an abysmal failure!"
Of course it is, it is unnatural to avoid it.
So the simple lesson here is not to avoid your responsibility.

About Political Hotsheet

Stay up to the minute on the latest news and developments from Washington, from the White House to Congress and everything in-between with the best political reporters from CBS News and CBSNews.com.

E-Mail Political Hotsheet
Follow On Twitter

Add to your favorite news reader
google
yahoo
msn
HOTSHEET ON TWITTER