Senate Rejects Abortion Amendment

(CBS/AP)  The Senate has rejected an effort to stiffen abortion restrictions in the health care bill.

The vote was 54 to 45.

Democratic Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah wanted to ban any insurance plan that gets taxpayer dollars from offering abortion coverage. The stronger restrictions mirrored provisions in the House-passed health care bill.

The Senate bill currently allows insurance plans to cover abortions but tries to separate private funds from federal money. It specifies that abortion coverage can only be paid for with private dollars.

"As our bill currently reads, no insurance plan in the new marketplace, whether private or public, would be allowed to use public funds for abortion," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

However, the abortion issue isn't finished in the Senate, reports CBS News Radio Correspondent Bob Fuss. Democrats will need to appease Nelson, who has said he will join a Republican filibuster of the whole bill if his concerns over abortion are not met.

After the vote, Nelson would not say whether he would filibuster over the abortion language.

"it makes it harder to be supportive, we'll see what happens," he said. "It's not my intent to go looking to achieve a compromise."

Seven Democrats supported the stiffer restrictions, while two Republicans Maine Sens. Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe voted with the Democrats. In the House, anti-abortion Democrats have threatened to vote against any final bill that dilutes the restrictions already approved in their bill.

Abortion opponents say the restrictions simply extend current federal laws that prohibit taxpayer funding of abortion except in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother. But abortion rights supporters said the restrictions would have the effect of denying women coverage for a legal medical procedure already covered by many insurance plans, even if they use their own money.

Poll Analysis: Opinions About Abortion Remain Remarkably Steady


"This amendment would place an unprecedented restriction on a woman's right to use her own money to purchase insurance coverage that includes abortion," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.

But Nelson called the separation of funds in the bill an accounting gimmick. "The reality is federal funds would help buy coverage that includes abortion," he said.

The vote came as Senate Democrats remained at odds on the issue of creating a new government insurance plan with time running out to pass Obama's health care remake by Christmas.

[petepilot]

Just a thought for all the hysterical anti abortion obsessives, pretty soon, folks, abortion is going to be mandatory after 1 child if we want keep the planet sustainable, ask the Chinese. Its coming and people with shows like 200 kids & counting are just hurrying the inevitable. So quit sweating the small stuff and spend your energy trying to make resources stretch further, go green, try to limit population growth or that day will be yesterday.

[troutfishyman]

We don't have a shortage of humans in the world. Why the fuss?

[jusella]

this bill is like saying to someone "okay go kill someone and we will give you insurance so, if you run into a problem we'll take care of it.

abortion is murder!!! no matter what fancy name you give it. if you don't want to get pregnant in the first place keep your cotton picking legs crossed. duh!!!!!! 8)

[slownewsday-5]

Personally, I feel that if life ends with the last breath, it begins with the first.

I tend to think those who call themselves "pro-life" are more often simply "pro-birth".

[AlwaysSmiling]

Jusella, I want to comment on the last statement that you made. "abortion is murder!!! no matter what fancy name you give it. if you don't want to get pregnant in the first place keep your cotton picking legs crossed. duh!!!!!! 8)"

You are showing ignorance in this statement. Why? Because you imply that the woman who was raped (and became pregnant) or the 13-year old girl who's being molested by her father/brother/or someone else, should "keep your cotton picking legs crossed" and it won't happen.

Also, you are overlooking another situation. Let's say, for example, that a couple are having a baby (want it, planned for it, etc) and a situation comes up where either the pregnancy has to be terminated, or both the mother and baby are going to die. In your eyes, we should let the mother and baby die-- instead of terminating the baby, and giving the parents another chance.

For the argument that if there's a complication, they probably won't have any future babies, I have a friend who's wife had to terminate the pregnancy at 20 weeks, because the water broke at 16 weeks. This was their first child. They now have two more that she gave birth to. So, yes, it does happen.

So, before you spout off ignorant comments like "abortion is murder!!! no matter what fancy name you give it. if you don't want to get pregnant in the first place keep your cotton picking legs crossed. duh!!!!!! 8)", stop and consider all of the possible reasons.

[starving1968-1]

by slownewsday-5 December 8, 2009 10:08 PM EST
nice new moniker, there! I've been thinking about changing mine up a bit, but can't think what it should be. I've had an imposter today, as well...






I didn't have much of a choice.

That B**CH newyorkmom banned me FOUR TIMES, and then CBS must have made "hungry" off limits to boot!!

The thing that really gets me, is that I never violated the terms of service. She simply reported me time and time again, because she didn't like what I was saying, and BAM - I was censored.

[Heartlight]

Good news! We are never going back to the back alleys, or coat hangers. It is a personal choice. Women who cannot afford to have the procedure surely cannot afford to have the child.Don't want an abortion? Don't have one. I have adopted my grandchild, and hope a woman would have enough family support to be able to have her child-but this is not always the case in the real world.

[gotoolyourself]

What perv thought to illustrate this story with a silhouette of a nude woman and two phallic looking symbols in the background?

[patkelly03]

People are by nature diverse. This is how things are supposed to be. When you try and force everyone to adhere to a highly restrictive set of moral standards you deny others the freedom to be who and what they are. Ironically you also deny the same for yourself. While you may agree with Christian based morality, forcing that morality upon others is wrong. Others have inalienable rights to be and act homosexual or to control what happens to their body or to get out of a failed relationship or to freely enjoy their sexuality without religious nonsense inhibiting them. To assume life should only consist of "positive" things is to delude yourself to the realities that go hand in hand with life. Life is filled with pain and death none of which is positive but both play a necessary role.

[patkelly03]

I am a Democrat and I am not interested in how a woman becomes pregnant. It is none of my business and dare I say none of yours either. If a woman decides she does not want to bring a baby to term then I say it is her decision and indeed her right to freely make that decision without the Taliban (conservative republicans) trying to force THEIR false moralities upon everyone. Who are you to try and deny a woman?s right to an abortion? What makes you think your alleged morals are in any way superior to anyone else?s? Who are you to force others to adhere to standards you yourself would surely abandon were you to step into another?s shoes for a single moment. How easy it is for some to look down upon others as they delude themselves into believing they or their ideas are the least bit superior.

It is laughable how conservative republicans claim they want less government interference in their lives while at the same time trying to limit everyone?s choices via government legislation to only those choices they happen to agree with. If you want to act like morality police then you should join the Taliban and move to a country that does not aspire to freedom and liberty.

[BeckieBest]

Wingnuts,


"The Senate bill currently allows insurance plans to cover abortions but tries to separate private funds from federal money. It specifies that abortion coverage can only be paid for with private dollars."

"As our bill currently reads, no insurance plan in the new marketplace, whether private or public, would be allowed to use public funds for abortion," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev."

[starving1968-1]

It doesn't matter WHAT it says Becky.

It only matters what Hannity and beck TELL THEM is in the legislation. Betsy McCaughey will misread and misinterpret it again, make another crackpot statement like "death panels", and Rush and the boys will convince all of their little lemmings that it's really in the bill.

[slownewsday-5]

nice new moniker, there! I've been thinking about changing mine up a bit, but can't think what it should be. I've had an imposter today, as well...

[wfw3536]

I thought Obama said the government wasn't going to fund or include abortion in this health care bill. I guess he wasn't telling us the whole story. Now the democrats in the Senate are showing their true colors. Having the government fund and/or support the killing of a new life is wrong. It is too bad that Obama wasn't honest about abortion being included in this health care bill.

I guess we know where Obama and the democrat senators stand so when we vote next time the decision will be easy to vote them out of office.

[starving1968-1]

How is Obama being dishonest? He doesn't create the legislation!

Does ANYONE other than myself KNOW how our government works?!?!

[BeckieBest]

wtf3536



Since you aparently don't actually read the stories before you start whining, I've taken the liberty of quoting it here:


"The Senate bill currently allows insurance plans to cover abortions but tries to separate private funds from federal money. It specifies that abortion coverage can only be paid for with private dollars."

"As our bill currently reads, no insurance plan in the new marketplace, whether private or public, would be allowed to use public funds for abortion," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev."