Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Stupak Abortion Language to Be Substituted for Senate Language in Deal to Secure Health Care Votes
FiredogLake ^ | 3/19/10 | Jane Hamsher

Posted on 03/19/2010 7:45:03 PM PDT by LdSentinal

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has made a deal with Rep. Bart Stupak in order to secure his vote and that of other anti-choice Democrats for the health care bill, which is scheduled to be voted on this Sunday. According to a member of Congress who was briefed on the matter, Pelosi has agreed to let Stupak have a vote on his amendment either before or after the House votes to pass the Senate bill. It instructs the Senate to substitute the language in his amendment for the Senate language on abortion.

FDL has obtained a copy of the concurrent resolution (PDF), which includes cosponsors Marion Berry, Sanford Bishop, Joseph Cao, Kathy Dahlkemper, Steve Driehaus, Marcy Kaptur, Dan Lipinski, Alan Mollohan, and Nick Rahall. A second source confirms that with the exception of Cao, these are the members of Congress who are still on the fence. Cao is still considered a firm “no” vote.

The deal calls for Stupak to have a vote on his amendment either before or after the House votes to confirm the Senate bill on Sunday. Stupak is confident that he has the votes to pass the measure and is happy to have the vote after the House passes the Senate bill. He believes that by using a “tie bar” measure, his amendment would be “tied” to the health care bill — which would require just 51 votes in the Senate.

Pro-choice members of the House, however, are demanding that the vote on the Concurrent Resolution happen before the House confirms the Senate bill. If in fact it passes, they plan to vote against confirming the Senate bill. They want Rep. Diana Degette to release the names of the 41 cosigners to her letter who pledged to vote against any bill that restricts a woman’s right to choose, and they are angry that the White House has been whipping to push through the Stupak deal.

“It is outrageous that a Democratic Speaker, a Democratic Majority Leader and a Democratic President should support rolling back women’s reproductive rights,” says one member of the group.

Alan Grayson, who voted against the Stupak Amendment when it went before the house last October, now has 80 cosponors for his public option amendment but has not been granted a floor vote. “I wonder why we can have a vote to please anti-choice clique, and we can’t have a vote on the public option” he says.

Text of the Concurrent Resolution below the jump

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MR. STUPAK (for himself, MR. Berry, Mr. Bishop of Georgia, Mr. Cao, Ms. Dahlkemper, Mr. Driehaus, Ms. Kaptur, Mr. Lipinski, Mr. Mollohan, and Mr. Rahall) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the committee on ________

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION Correcting the enrollment of H.R. 3590

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring) That in the enrollment of the bill H.R. 3590, the Clerk of the House of Representatives shall make the following corrections:

(1) In the section 1303 amended by section 10104(c) of the bill –

(A) in the section heading, insert “RELATING TO COVERAGE OF ABORTION SERVICES” after “SPECIAL RULES”; AND

(B) strike subsection (a) and all of subsection (b) that precedes paragraph (4) and insert the following:

“(a) IN GENERAL — Nothing in this Act (or any amendment made by this Act) shall be construed to require any health plan to provide coverage of abortion services or allow the Secretary or any other person or entity implementing this Act (or amendment) to require coverage of such services.

“(b) LIMITATION ON ABORTION FUNDING –

“(1) iN GENERAL — None of the funds authorized or appropriated by this Act (or an amendment made by this Act), including credits under section 36N of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, shall be expected for any abortion or to cover any part of the costs of any health plan that includes coverage of abortion, except in the case where a woman suffers from the physical disorder physical injury, or physical illness that would, as certified by a physician, place the woman in danger of death unless an abortion is performed, including life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself, or unless the pregnancy is the result of an act of rape or incest.

“(2) OPTION TO PURCHASE SEPARATE COVERAGE OR PLAN _- Subject to paragraph (1), noting in this subsection shall be construed as prohibiting any non-Federal entity (including an individual or a State orlocal government) from purchasing separate coverage for abortions for which funding is prohibited under this subsection, or a plan that inclues such abortions, so long as such coverage or plan is not purchased using the non-Federal funds required to receive a Federal payment, including a preminum payment required for the qualified health plan towards whith the credit described in paragraph (1) is applied or a State’s or locality’s contribution of Medicaid matching funds.

“(3) OPTION TO OFFER COVERAGE OR PLAN — Subject to paragraph (1), noting in this subsection shall restrict any non-Federal health insurance insurer offering a qualified health plan from offering separate coverage for abortions for which funding is prohibited under this subsection, or a plan that includes such abortions for which funding is prohibited under this subsection, or a plan that inclue3s such abortions, so long as any such insurer that offers a qualified health plan through any Exchange that includes coverage for abortions for which funding is prohibited under this subsection also offers a qualified health plan through the Exchange that is identical in every respect except it does not cover such abortions.”

(2) In subsection (a) of the section 1334 added by section 10104(q) of the bill, strike paragraph (6) and redesignate paragraph (7) as paragraph (6).


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Michigan
KEYWORDS: 111th; abortion; bhoabortion; bhohealthcare; caves; deathpanels; michigan; obamacare; romney; romneycare; satanshelper; socializedmedicine; stupak
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161 next last
To: Diogenesis

We’re in for the fight of our lives trying to make sense of what is going on and you have to get in your hatred for Romney on every thread. Gee, where are your Rudy-in-a-dress pics? It’s all so old. Get a new act already!


101 posted on 03/19/2010 8:44:28 PM PDT by Miss Didi ("After all...tomorrow is another day." Scarlett O'Hara, Gone with the Wind)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: dschapin

That’s what I think.


102 posted on 03/19/2010 8:45:33 PM PDT by the Real fifi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: LdSentinal
Stupak in the Youtube embedded on firedoglake says that he would expect the Concurrent Resolution to be passed by both houses before the House takes up the Senate Bill.
103 posted on 03/19/2010 8:46:18 PM PDT by cmj328 (Filibuster FOCA--a/k/a ObamaCare--or lose reelection)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hoodat

The Stupak language was already rejected by the Senate—I think it could only get 45 votes. So if he thinks his language will be adopted by the Senate he’s either a fool or a sellout.


104 posted on 03/19/2010 8:46:22 PM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: MsLady

This is a “lie.” Stupak will stand up for what he believes on this issue. The Democrats will not compromise at all. The pro death issue is too important for the Democrats to give anything to Stupak.

Stupak will be the MVP at the end of the day. Mark my words.


105 posted on 03/19/2010 8:48:01 PM PDT by truthandlife ("Some trust in chariots and some in horses, but we trust in the name of the LORD our God." (Ps 20:7))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: cmj328

Yeah, I was hoping that it was like an Amendment - in that once the House adopted it changes would be immediately made. However, I think you are right that this would only take effect if both houses agree. In which case, this would be a bad thing since whether it passed both houses or died in the Senate the Senate bill would still become law in the end.


106 posted on 03/19/2010 8:49:20 PM PDT by dschapin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

is this a new story update?

http://news.firedoglake.com/2010/03/19/the-stupak-amendment-is-back-whats-an-enrollment-corrections-bill/


107 posted on 03/19/2010 8:50:10 PM PDT by SteveAustin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

“Stupak will be the MVP at the end of the day. Mark my words.”

I pray you are right. I think that’s why Lipinski is hanging tough with him....he’s a Chicago Dem!


108 posted on 03/19/2010 8:52:12 PM PDT by Fu-fu2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: BARLF

What I meant was that for about 30 minutes that article was not appearing when linking to www.firedoglake.com, as it should have and does now. It was only accessible using the link you posted. I was beginning to question whether it was hacked.


109 posted on 03/19/2010 8:56:38 PM PDT by thouworm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: LdSentinal
The cash flow from ActBlue - organized by Firedoglake and allies including MoveOn - has come as a surprise to some of its beneficiaries, primarily members of Congress pledging to vote against health care legislation that lacks the public option.

Did you know this Jane Hamster ...Firedoglake is a far left liberal?

She works with MoveOn for goodness sakes.

110 posted on 03/19/2010 8:57:11 PM PDT by BARLF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thouworm
I saw your later post after I had posted that.

Something that disturbs me is this Jane Hamster is a leftie. I will not read anything else with her name on it. She's pushing this crap in this article because she wants health care to pass with no abortion funding killed. She lied, Stupak made no deal yet with the witch.

People should check these sites out and see who they are before believing everything posted here.

Yeah, I'm ticked at this false info presented in this article.

My above post shows she works with MoveOn!

111 posted on 03/19/2010 9:05:19 PM PDT by BARLF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: BARLF

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30131_Page2.html

Jane Hamster


112 posted on 03/19/2010 9:10:20 PM PDT by BARLF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: BARLF

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30131_Page2.html

Jane Hamster

Worth Repeating. She is a tool for the Obama campaign. SHE IS A LIAR!! DON'T BELIEVE THIS STORY.

The Dems are in big trouble and we need to continue the pressure and to continue to pray.


113 posted on 03/19/2010 9:14:45 PM PDT by truthandlife ("Some trust in chariots and some in horses, but we trust in the name of the LORD our God." (Ps 20:7))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Thank You truthandlife!


114 posted on 03/19/2010 9:16:56 PM PDT by BARLF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: BARLF
I agree. And for the longest time I could find no confirmation. Finally, this was the first (but even that only lead back to the original source):

The Left on Stupak Negotiations [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

Firedoglake purports to have some leakage.
National Review: The Corner

Even Lopez wasn't buying it. We have been seeing breathless headlines like "Pelosi says she has the votes." Duh... she has been saying that for...weeks? Why any reporter is trusting the words of a frantic, desperate, proven liar or her minions is beyond me. Whatever happened to independent sources, multiple confirmations...

115 posted on 03/19/2010 9:17:12 PM PDT by thouworm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: thouworm
I don't know ,but this article got a lot of people upset. People should take the time to confirm what they are reading, check out the author.

Isn't Move on.org sponsored by Soros?

Gad this makes me mad.

116 posted on 03/19/2010 9:22:55 PM PDT by BARLF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Man50D

“They gain the Stupak 12 but lose 40 pro abortion votes if I understand this correctly.”

Doubtful :-(
The hard-core lefties ALL folded like cheap suits on this and voted FOR the House bill WITH Stupak in it.

The only good news here is that pelosi would only be dealing with Stupak if she didnt have the votes otherwise.

The BAD news is that this is an absurd contraption that will NOT WORK. Stupak is nuts to fall for it.


117 posted on 03/19/2010 9:28:12 PM PDT by WOSG (OPERATION RESTORE AMERICAN FREEDOM - NOVEMBER, 2010 - DO YOUR PART!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: LdSentinal

The fight is not over, even if passed this Sunday. Keep your heads up and maintain your fighting spirit. This is far from over.


118 posted on 03/19/2010 9:33:40 PM PDT by cranked
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BARLF

From Hot Air (must read whole post from Allahpundit):

Chaos: Pelosi reaches deal with Stupak for Senate abortion vote?
posted at 11:51 pm on March 19, 2010 by Allahpundit

“Makes no sense.”

(snip)

A friend of the site e-mailed us about an hour ago to say that he spoke to a Democratic congressman he’s pals with earlier tonight. Quote:

“He tells me with certainty that they have plenty of votes and that some yes votes will be allowed to vote no if they choose for their protection. He says that everyone’s internal polling has been much better than expected. He says at this point that last sticking point is whether to give Stupak a separate vote, which Pelosi is considering.”

(snip)

Exit question: Is this all just lefty spin being fed to Firedoglake by peeved pro-choicers? We’ll find out at Stupak’s presser tomorrow. 11 a.m.!

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/03/19/chaos-pelosi-reaches-deal-with-stupak-for-senate-abortion-vote/


119 posted on 03/19/2010 9:35:17 PM PDT by thouworm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: WOSG
The hard-core lefties ALL folded like cheap suits on this and voted FOR the House bill WITH Stupak in it.

That's because they knew the Senate would strip it out. They were assured of that ahead of time. Repeating the same cycle gets them nowhere. If it can't pass now WITHOUT the Stupak amendment, it never will pass.

120 posted on 03/19/2010 9:40:34 PM PDT by randita (Sarah Palin has the same computer that I have.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson