Posted on 03/01/2010 8:05:30 AM PST by NYer
BIPARTISAN? President Obama holds a bipartisan meeting to discuss health reform legislation at Blair House in Washington Feb. 25. With Obama are Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and House Minority Leader John Boehner of Ohio.
WASHINGTON — As Democratic leaders in Congress and the White House decide how to pursue a likely final push for enactment of a national health-care overhaul this spring, Catholic and pro-life leaders see signs that the latest approach could expand public funding for abortion even beyond previous versions of health reform.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and pro-life groups are carefully tracking developments on the federal health-care overhaul that was upended by a special election in January in Massachusetts. Sen. Scott Brown, R-Mass., shocked the Washington establishment when he was elected to the Senate seat long held by Democratic Sen. Edward “Ted” Kennedy, after explicitly running as the crucial vote against the health-care bill.
The result was that prospects for a final negotiated health-care bill between House and Senate Democratic leaders fell apart as moderate Democrats feared for the impact of the bill on their own chances for re-election. This fear was reinforced by polls that indicated the legislation had fallen into disfavor with the majority of Americans.
“There are a number of rank–and-file Democrats worried that they could lose their seats if they vote for this bill,” said Richard Doerflinger, associate director of pro-life activities at the USCCB.
In the weeks since the Massachusetts election, President Obama has sought to restart the drive for a comprehensive health-care law by introducing his own $950 billion proposal and holding a Feb. 25 bipartisan summit to discuss various health-reform proposals.
The Obama proposal closely mirrors the Senate-passed bill, which Catholic and pro-life groups roundly criticized for allowing federal tax dollars to subsidize insurance plans that cover elective abortions and allowing federal agencies to require that all private insurance plans cover abortion as “preventive care.”
Additionally, the Obama approach could go even further than the permissive Senate bill by providing $11 billion for community health centers, some of which could use that funding to directly cover abortions they provide, according to pro-life critics.
“The president’s proposal is the most pro-abortion of the health-care proposals to date,” said Matthew Faraci, a spokesman for Americans United for Life.
The bill also lacks many of the conscience protections that would keep Catholic health-care workers from having to participate in abortion or other unethical procedures, noted Doerflinger.
Democratic Defections
It was notable that Obama chose the abortion- and conscience-language approach of the Senate-passed health bill over the House-passed bill language, which included strong pro-life protections sponsored by Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich.
The pro-abortion language could undermine the legislative chances of the final health bill because Stupak and up to 12 other pro-life Democrats who supported the House-passed bill would oppose a final bill without abortion-funding restrictions. They could be joined by liberal Democrats who are upset that the final bill does not offer a so-called public option, according to health-care lobbyists.
Such Democratic defections would doom the health-care bill in the face of unified Republican opposition because the earlier version passed the House by only a five-vote margin.
A third group of Democrats that may move en masse against the bill are members of the fiscally conservative Blue Dog Caucus, according to lobbyists. Many of these Democrats are from conservative districts and particularly sensitive to the decrease in public support for any health-care bill.
Democratic leaders and other supporters of the health-care bill have focused on swinging public sentiment back in favor of the overhaul, in order to bolster nervous moderate Democrats in the House.
“No legislative procedure is going to work until the public is shown that this is not the horrible bill that they have been led to believe,” said David Kendall, senior fellow for health policy at Third Way, a group that has supported the Democratic health-care bills.
There is also a strong possibility that Democrats may use a controversial tactic known as reconciliation, in which they would pass the bill in the Senate with a simple majority of 51 votes, rather than the 60 votes needed to break a filibuster. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Friday revealed that Democratic leaders are asking the Senate to pass the legislation with a “simple majority.”
Supporters of the health bills may have a large task in re-winning the public to their side. A February CNN poll echoed many others when it reported that only 25% of Americans supported enactment of a health-care bill similar to the one already passed by the House and Senate. Abortion opponents also point out to swing district Democrats that there is wide public opposition to public funding of elective abortion. A December Quinnipiac University poll found 72% oppose the use of taxpayer funds to pay for abortions under any health-care reform effort.
“We’re focusing on reaching out to members of the House and encouraging them to continue to stand for life,” Faraci said.
‘Difficult Bind’
If Democratic leaders are unable to garner enough support for the Obama measure, then a piecemeal approach that advances individual pieces of a health-care overhaul separately is also possible, according to health-care experts. However, a limited approach will not come until Obama and congressional Democrats have exhausted all efforts to enact a comprehensive package, if only because they have already invested so much time and prestige on the effort.
“The polling is rather against doing anything on this scale right now,” Doerflinger said. Democratic leaders “are in a difficult bind.”
Is there any reason why people can’t pay for their own damn abortions? It should be paid for as any other elective surgery.
"The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time: the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them." - Thomas Jefferson
"The world is very different now...and yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe--the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God." - John F. Kennedy
Then, on January 22, 2009, news agencies reported that one of his first acts was the following, as reported by Reuters:
"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama on Friday lifted restrictions on U.S. government funding for groups that provide abortion services or counseling abroad, reversing a policy of his Republican predecessor George W. Bush, a spokesman said."
"Barack Obama
"The Democratic president's decision was a victory for advocates of abortion rights on an issue that in recent years has become a tit-for-tat policy change each time the White House shifts from one party to the other.
"When the ban was in place, no U.S. government funding for family planning services could be given to clinics or groups that offer abortion services or counseling in other countries even if the funds for those activities come from non-U.S. government sources.
"Obama signed an executive order lifting the restrictions on Friday, a White House spokesman said."
Of course, the Senate's version of the 2010 Bill is "preferred" by Obama and the Democrats! It fits the goals and aims of Pelosi, Reid, and the President on this important matter.
so many of our nation’s greatest problems can be directly sourced to moral failure.
Because if people had to pay for their own abortions people who didn’t have the money wouldn’t be able to afford to get them. The pro-choice/pro-abortion folks find this to be unjust. Their view is that every woman should be able to get an abortion on demand. If they cannot afford it, the most likely cause is the unjustness of our paternalistic capitalist society. People who have money under this system have it at least in part because of the oppression of those who don’t, so it’s only just to take the money from the oppressors and give it to the people who are oppressed.
OBAMANOMICS—TRICKLE DOWN DESTRUCTION of the economy
SET THEIR LOCAL AND DC LINES ON FIRE!
PLEASE ASK THEM TO REPEAL THE BIG NEW FEES in TRICARE for Life, the retired Military over 65 secondary health ins. which they passed in a DOD bill. They promised our Military these benefits, and our Military have earned them.
Bambi doesn’t keep his promises...so buyer beware!
Sen Scott Brown’s number is 202-224-4543
Capitol Hill switchboard is 202-224-3121
Lots of local demwit phone numbers on this thread
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2408217/posts
Rename, repackage, rewrite it a tad smaller, and sell another pig in a poke. NO COLAs for granny, retired Military or retired fed employees. BIG NEW fees for Tricare for Life retired over 65 Military’s secondary health ins.
(DOD bill already passed, delayed but goes into effect 2011 NEEDS TO BE REPEALED!
OBAMA’s WAR ON SENIORS http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2433867/posts/
New Dem mantra: Woof, woof eat dog food granny....ala let them eat cake. http://www.lifenews.com/bio3058.html
Friday, February 19, 2010
Obama says slight fix will extend Social Security
http://townhall.com/news/us/2010/02/19/obama_says_slight_fix_will_extend_social_security
Health Care Rationing for Seniors Another Problem in New Obama Plan http://www.lifenews.com/bio3058.html
Medicare tax may apply to investment income (ObamaCare tax hike)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2460988/posts
SOCIALIZED MED THREAD http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2461394/posts
TRI CARE FOR LIFE This from a google search:
http://economicspolitics.blogspot.com/2009/05/tricare-for-life-is-obama-trying-to.html
This option would help reduce the costs of TFL, as well as costs for Medicare, by introducing minimum out-of pocket requirements for beneficiaries. Under this option, TFL would not cover any of the first $525 of an enrollee’s cost-sharing liabilities for calendar year 2011 and would limit coverage to 50 percent of the next $4,725 in Medicare cost sharing that the beneficiary incurred. (Because all further cost sharing would be covered by TFL, enrollees could not pay more than $2,888 in cost sharing in that year.) http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/99xx/doc9925/12-18-HealthOptions.pdf
http://www.vawatchdog.org/09/hcva09/hcva110609-1.htm
Bill Would Restrict Veterans’ Health Care Options 11/06/09
Buyer and McKeon Offer Amendments to Protect Veterans and TRICARE Beneficiaries
Congress plans to block Tricare fee increases
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/10/military_tricarefees_blocked_100709w
http://www.navytimes.com/news/2009/10/military_tricarefees_blocked_100709w/
By Rick Maze - Staff writer, Oct 7, 2009
Tricare fee increases imposed last week by the Defense Department will be repealed by a provision of the compromise 2010 defense authorization bill unveiled Wednesday by House and Senate negotiators.
Snip The fee increases were announced on Sept. 30 and took effect on Oct. 1, but the defense bill, HR 2647, includes a provision barring any fee increases until the start of fiscal 2011.
Snip
Retired Army Maj. Gen. Bill Matz, president of the National Association for Uniformed Services, said the announcement of fee increases was shocking considering that the Obama administration promised earlier this year to hold off on any new fee Tricare fee increases until fiscal 2011.
“President Obama and DoD assured NAUS and the entire military family earlier this year that there would rightly be no increases in any Tricare fees” in fiscal 2010, Matz said. “We took them at their word, and I can’t believe that a co-pay increase like this was allowed to go forward,” he added.
Yes, there IS a reason people can’t pay for their own abortions.
The infernal left, inspired by their ideological father,
desires to make everyone complicit in the murder of the innocent.
That's really a powerful point.
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.