Posted on 11/07/2009 5:26:39 PM PST by cmj328
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- A handful of pro-life Republicans in Congress have a difference of opinion on legislative strategy and it has produced a friction that has blossomed during the debate on the pro-abortion health care bill. The difference concerns whether the Stupak Amendment could result in helping the health care bill.
The pro-life movement has been fighting for months to get language included in the health care reform bill to make sure it does not fund abortions through the public option and the affordability credits.
After refusing pro-life Rep. Bart Stupak a vote on his amendment to stop abortion funding, Speaker Nancy Pelosi caved in on Friday night and allowed a vote today because enough pro-life and moderate Democrats threatened to defect and vote against the bill.
Pelosi allowed the vote but, during the debate today, House Democrats refused to say whether they would keep the Stupak amendment in the bill as it moves along in the process, even if it is approved.
Sensing that and worrying that adding the amendment would allow more votes on the bill itself from pro-life Democrats who would otherwise vote against it should it lack the Stupak amendment, some pro-life Republicans plan to vote "present" on the Stupak amendment.
Rep. John Shadegg, an Arizona Republican who is pro-life, has been emailing back and forth today about the amendment vote and is the leading lawmaker who may vote present. He even signed a letter calling on Congress to allow the Stupak amendment vote.
He disagrees with groups like the Family Research Council and Americans United for Life who have said they will score any present votes as a no vote against the pro-life amendment.
Shadegg told Politico this afternoon that this is a “bad call” for pro-life organizations and he doesn't want to “give a vote away” to pro-life groups that he believes would help ensure passage of the health care reform bill.
“(Nancy) Pelosi is speaker and she’s pro abortion every minute of every hour of every day as speaker,” Shadegg said. “This is a vote to help her move the bill forward.”
“This is a gut-wrenching issue for a lot of people,” Shadegg said. “But I won't support Pelosi’s bill, which is not pro-life at all.”
Shadegg said he expected four other pro-life Republicans to go along with voting present on the amendment -- which could jeopardize passage of the Stupak amendment and keep abortion funding in the bill.
Politico indicates Republican Reps. Phil Gingrey, Steve King and Scott Garrett are likely to vote present.
National Right to Life legislative director Douglas Johnson told LifeNews.com he is very disappointed to hear some pro-life members will vote present. His group sent a letter to every Republican member of the House urging a yes vote on the Stupak amendment.
"The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), its state affiliates, and many other pro-life groups -- including major religious bodies -- have worked hard for months to win adoption of the amendment to remove federal funding of abortion from the health care legislation," the letter said.
He noted that 158 republicans signed a letter to Pelosi calling for the vote.
"If lawmakers who claim the label of 'pro-life' now were to betray past commitments and withhold support from the amendment to remove government funding of abortion from the health care bill, by voting 'present,' resulting in the defeat of the Stupak-Pitts Amendment, it would be a day that would live in infamy," the Right to Life letter continued.
Watch what happens when the USCCB drops its objection to the bill.
I disagree, and I think that NRL is dead wrong on this.
If enough left wing Democrats vote against the amendment, fine. But if they vote for it, with the intention of killing it later, then the Republicans MUST vote present, or even “no” if necessary.
This health bill, even WITH the amendment, would be an atrocity, which would end up legalizing euthanasia. It would also end up legalizing tax-paid abortion—that step would just be delayed a little.
WE MUST VOTE DOWN THIS ENTIRE BILL. WHATEVER IT TAKES. Sometimes parliamentary procedure requires voting in strange ways, especially when you lack a large enough minority to block passage of an atrocious bill.
Frankly, this isn’t the first time I’ve seen NRLC do something stupid. They lack political sense.
The bishops are not going to be played for suckers.
It was only cover for ‘Blue Dogs’ that want government control health care & abortion, but didn’t want to get nailed for it. With no commitment for it to go into the Conference bill, it was just cover. Period.
My Dem had stated that he could not vote for HR3962 if the abortion amendment wasn’t included. It was defeated? Then I and alot of other Catholics in the district will hold his feet to the fire if he votes yes to HR3962. Anyone who thinks otherwise is naive.
This is why we can never win. We are in total agreement about abortion. But you can’t see that them defeating the abortion provisions actually gives us great ammunition.
The Catholic Bishops will have to publicly oppose it from the rooftops. This gives us impetus to join with bleeding heart liberals who are against the murder of children but for big government healthcare, and yes, I know a lot of them. The majority of America is pro-life now, the idiots just haven’t accepted that.
You vile Troll.
Go back to the DU .
Pray
You apparently don't understand Catholic moral teaching as it related to legislative processes. You can't force a legislator to support your policy simply by holding a gun to the head of a baby.
Not from me! I think this is a brilliant move. THis bill is very anti life for more than just babies!
Amen!
I don't, but many Republican voting socially conservatives do. There goes the coalition.
It seems to me that the majority of the bishops WANT this government debacle! But they can’t support it if it covers abortion. This amendment gave them cover too.
All true, but they’re not going to be wagged like a dog.
In all fairness I have a feeling that a lot social conservatives knew this was a sham and I also think that there isn’t one socon that votes Republican support socialize medicine.. Give me one socon that does support universal health care... Go away troll...
This bill is NOT just about pro-life issues. It is about government out of control in just about every area of our lives leaving us with massive debt. ANY Republican who supports any part of it should be booted out. If the amendment fails and abortion is left in, it will put the pro-life Democrats in a tough position. If the amendment passes with Republican support, then the Republicans will have a difficult time not voting for the bill and it will give pro-life Democrats reasons to vote for it.
I must be dense, you’re going to have to explain that comment.
Doing that right now!
Most socons I know are otherwise liberal Democrats but they vote Republican when the candidate is pro-life. MOST of them.
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.