We all knew it wasn't going to pass without a fight...and some compromises. But when the House just barely eked out enough votes to pass the health care reform bill on Saturday, some significant changes were made at the last minute that have pro-choice advocates reeling. Many feel that abortion was thrown under the bus in order to gain the support of pro-life Democrats who threatened to bury the bill.
Yes, women gained a great many benefits under the version of the health care reform bill that the House passed. But we've lost significant ground on the issue of abortion. Millions of women have just lost access to a safe and legal medical procedure because of what happened last week.
Writing for the Women's Media Center, Peggy Simpson is aghast that the worst rollback of women's reproductive rights in decades happened so casually and so quickly:
It was a showdown shocker between the Catholic bishops and women's rights--and the bishops won.
The House bill would provide the most sweeping expansion of federal prohibitions on abortion since 1976, when the Hyde Amendment was enacted that has since banned federal funds for abortion in the military, the Foreign Service, the Peace Corps, Medicaid and other federally connected health care services....
The first woman House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, a pro-choice Catholic with decades of experience in counting votes, made the deal....
Fewer than two weeks ago...the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops...began spreading the word to grass roots Catholics to lobby House members to oppose health care reform unless anti-abortion bans were tightened. Only in recent days did they insist on applying the Hyde amendment to health care plans.
An amendment proposed by Rep. Bart Stupack (D-Michigan) essentially expanded Hyde to the health care reform bill; and to gain the votes of pro-life Democrats, Pelosi allowed the Stupak amendment to be voted on, and it passed. The amended bill then went on to narrowly pass in the House by only 5 votes.
As Simpson describes it:
Pro-choice House members were furious and said so.
[Representative Rosa] DeLauro [D-CT] called abortion "a matter of conscience on both sides of the debate," adding that the Stupak amendment takes away the "freedom of conscience from American women" and prohibits them from abortion coverage "even if they pay for it with their own money."
Representative Barbara Lee, D-CA, said she had been reared in the Catholic Church and respected Stupak but called his amendment "simply outrageous" for inserting the church's "religious views into our public policy....We're a democracy, not a theocracy."
Women gained a great deal from the passage of the health care reform act. But we lost a critical right that many have taken for granted for decades. That fact needs to be made known loud and clear. Abortion, a legal medical procedure, will now be blocked from nearly all the health care plans made possible by health care reform. As Terry O'Neill, President of NOW explains:
The Stupak Amendment, if incorporated into the final version of health insurance reform legislation, will:
- Prevent women receiving tax subsidies from using their own money to purchase private insurance that covers abortion;
- Prevent women participating in the public health insurance exchange, administered by private insurance companies, from using 100 percent of their own money to purchase private insurance that covers abortion;
- Prevent low-income women from accessing abortion entirely, in many cases.
At least two prominent national reproductive rights groups say that this version of health care reform will leave women "worse off" than before. Is this what we wanted from health care reform?
Related articles:
Comments
An article From the NY Times
“ROME, Oct. 11 — A comprehensive global study of abortion has concluded that abortion rates are similar in countries where it is legal and those where it is not, suggesting that outlawing the procedure does little to deter women seeking it.
Moreover, the researchers found that abortion was safe in countries where it was legal, but dangerous in countries where it was outlawed and performed clandestinely. Globally, abortion accounts for 13 percent of women’s deaths during pregnancy and childbirth, and there are 31 abortions for every 100 live births, the study said.
”
So it’s going to happen whether it’s “available” or not.
If you want to take it from a purely fiscal standpoint, a one time fee for abortion is a whole lot cheaper than the $1000’s of subsidies every month people pay for welfare kids.
If you want to take it from an emotional standpoint. Raising a kid you can’t afford or don’t want is a whole lot more emotional than an abortion. Giving a kid up for adoption into a system where they are very likely to be abused and passed around like they are subhuman is very emotional. (did you know it’s easy to adopt a kid from overseas than from our own system?)
If you want to look at it from a “good for society” standpoint, it is better for society to have people who actually feel they were “wanted” than the low self-esteem from knowing you were and unwanted burden to your parents.
If you want to look at it from a family perspective, if a loving father were in the picture, chances are abortion would not be on the list of “choices” for the mother.
If you want to look at it from a biblical perspective take a look at what your god ordered in:
Numbers 31:17
Deuteronomy 2:34
Deuteronomy 28:53
I Samuel 15:3
2 Kings 8:12
2 Kings 15:16
Isaiah 13:16
Isaiah 13:18
Lamentations 2:20
Ezekiel 9:6
Hosea 9:14
Hosea 13:16
If you want to look at what the bible says about causing misscariage look at Ex. 21:22-25
If you want to look at it from a human perspective, consider that 1 out of 6 people on this planet is currently labeled as “starving”.
Why are you forcing women you do not want, are not financially capable, are not emotionally capable to have kids.
Why are you not forcing them to take family planning education and promoting contraceptive use? Condoms would prevent most (if not all) of unwanted pregnancies so the emotional distress of having to choose between having a baby or not, giving it up or not is no longer an issue.
For everyone who opposes condom use (Especially all catholics) why are you FORCING married couples to have kids if they are not ready for one? THEY are allowed to have s e x aren’t they?
For anyone who won’t admit people have s e x outside of marriage….GROW UP!!!
Barbara Lee is a Communist. See Proof Here: http://www.commieblaster.com/progressives/index.html#Anchor-47857
I have no idea why the Roman Catholic and the Church of Rome are so powerful in lobbying in the United States Congress.
This is a country established with a separation of state and church. What about the rest of us?
Women who are desperate to not have an unwanted child that they cannot support nor deal with will many times manage to end the situation. If they cannot afford a safe end, then they will resort to the old “back alley” matter and put their lives in danger.
What in the world is our country considering in making this situation a last resort for young women.
Mary, an old woman in Miami
I don’t know of any abortion ins. at this time. There was already and law that federal money cannot be used for abortions, so whats the fuss? I don’t think people that argue about this understand how utterly screwed we are if they pass this so called reform. So, It all doesn’t matter anyway
So Sara, when slavery became illegal and racist whites burned blacks as a protest, when there was complete and utter chaos that ensued as a result of making slavery illegal, do you say, “Man since things got worse for blacks as a result, we should just let slavery remain legal.” So you suggest appeasing the fringes that are going to “do it anyway?” By that logic, should we make all other crimes legal on the account that it doesn’t deter criminals?
As for religion, you think pro-lifers argue on a biblical stand point, but there are many atheists women, and non-religious people who are against abortion.
You want to look at it from a WOMAN’S rights perspective? What about a woman’s fundamental HUMAN rights to be born? What about pro-life WOMEN’S rights to not force them help you kill another human being? Even if baby-killing is a right, it is not an entitlement at MY expense.
You want to look at it from an economic perspective? If you had to choose between paying MORE for someone’s medical care to stay alive, or LESS to kill them, you would kill them to save a few bucks? So you are saying that economic convenience justifies killing an innocent baby?
As for a kid experiencing guilt for being burden,so what? There are many kids who grow up hearing a lot of negativity as a result of being unwanted, but they still embrace the world as their oyster and are greatful to be alive, and use that experience to be better than their parents in the future. All you are doing is promting irresponsibility, and celebrating non-resiliency.
I think that it is disgusting that out of all the things women have yet to accomplish, this is the one issue where they choose to foam at the mouth defending.
Women want to be empowered when it comes to big dicks, but it when it comes to accountability and responsibilty (which is what being proactive is really about) they want to be victims when it conveniences them.
Another thing stop using the Pro-lifers are ulta-conservative, opressive, religious freaks. There is a lot of pro-life diversity out there so the religion card is lame.
F***ing is a right, but being born is a privilege? How lucky you women are that your mothers actually wanted you, and thought the rigors of pregnancy was worth having you.