More Polling in Key Districts Show Majorities Oppose Gov-Funded Abortion, Healthcare Reform

Posted on March 16, 2010 by KHernandez

Whip counts are changing every five minutes it seems. For those of you not bogged down in Washington lingo, a whip count is the number of Members of Congress who are voting for/against a certain bill. In this case, the whip count on the healthcare bill is all anyone is talking about, as they should be. Pelosi needs 216 votes and counts are anywhere from 190 up to 204 for the bill.

Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121

Not only is this healthcare bill a complete disaster for the US economy if it passes but it will force all taxpayers for fund abortion on demand.

“We will do what is necessary to pass this healthcare bill” – Speaker Nancy Pelosi, March 16, 2010

And the Democrats are trying to do just that with the possibility of the “Slaughter Solution”, which would, in essence, “deem” the Senate bill passed by the House without an actual vote. No joke.

Anyway, don’t stop contacting your Member of Congress, especially if you live in any of the districts below – it’s believed that these Members are on the fence. Specific polling was done in these districts and its clear that people oppose government funding of abortion and that it would be political suicide for elected officials to vote for the healthcare reform bill.

Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121

Here’s the polling summary from the Susan B. Anthony List:

AR-04 Mike Ross

72% oppose using tax dollars to pay for abortions (68% strongly oppose)
84% oppose taxpayer funding of abortions as part of healthcare reform (73% strongly oppose)
73% agree that abortion and abortion funding have no place in healthcare legislation (61% strongly agree)
65% would be less likely to vote to re-elect Congressman Ross if he votes for healthcare legislation that includes federal government funding of abortion (53% would be much less likely)

FL-02 Allen Boyd

73% oppose using tax dollars to pay for abortions (60% strongly oppose)
75% oppose taxpayer funding of abortions as part of healthcare reform (61% strongly oppose)
63% agree that abortion and abortion funding have no place in healthcare legislation (52% strongly agree)
60% would be less likely to vote to re-elect Congressman Boyd if he votes for healthcare legislation that includes federal government funding of abortion (44% would be much less likely)

GA-12 John Barrow

78% oppose using tax dollars to pay for abortions (59% strongly oppose)
76% oppose taxpayer funding of abortions as part of healthcare reform (58% strongly oppose)
64% agree that abortion and abortion funding have no place in healthcare legislation (53% strongly agree)
53% would be less likely to vote to re-elect Congressman Barrow if he votes for healthcare legislation that includes federal government funding of abortion (38% would be much less likely)

IN-02 Joe Donnelly

80% oppose using tax dollars to pay for abortions (66% strongly oppose)
78% oppose taxpayer funding of abortions as part of healthcare reform (66% strongly oppose)
70% agree that abortion and abortion funding have no place in healthcare legislation (58% strongly agree)
60% would be less likely to vote to re-elect Congressman Donnelly if he votes for healthcare legislation that includes federal government funding of abortion (47% would be much less likely)

IN-08 Brad Ellsworth

80% oppose using tax dollars to pay for abortions (69% strongly oppose)
81% oppose taxpayer funding of abortions as part of healthcare reform (71% strongly oppose)
72% agree that abortion and abortion funding have no place in healthcare legislation (60% strongly agree)
65% would be less likely to vote to re-elect Congressman Ellsworth if he votes for healthcare legislation that includes federal government funding of abortion (53% would be much less likely)

IN-09 Baron Hill

77% oppose using tax dollars to pay for abortions (67% strongly oppose)
75% oppose taxpayer funding of abortions as part of healthcare reform (66% strongly oppose)
72% agree that abortion and abortion funding have no place in healthcare legislation (61% strongly agree)
61% would be less likely to vote to re-elect Congressman Hill if he votes for healthcare legislation that includes federal government funding of abortion (51% would be much less likely)

MA-02 Richard Neal

63% oppose using tax dollars to pay for abortions (46% strongly oppose)
62% oppose taxpayer funding of abortions as part of healthcare reform (48% strongly oppose)
56% agree that abortion and abortion funding have no place in healthcare legislation (43% strongly agree)
47% would be less likely to vote to re-elect Congressman Neal if he votes for healthcare legislation that includes federal government funding of abortion (31% would be much less likely)

MI-05 Dale Kildee

75% oppose using tax dollars to pay for abortions (57% strongly oppose)
75% oppose taxpayer funding of abortions as part of healthcare reform (57% strongly oppose)
65% agree that abortion and abortion funding have no place in healthcare legislation (53% strongly agree)
56% would be less likely to vote to re-elect Congressman Kildee if he votes for healthcare legislation that includes federal government funding of abortion (37% would be much less likely)

MN-08 Jim Oberstar

73% oppose using tax dollars to pay for abortions (61% strongly oppose)
74% oppose taxpayer funding of abortions as part of healthcare reform (60% strongly oppose)
68% agree that abortion and abortion funding have no place in healthcare legislation (54% strongly agree)
56% would be less likely to vote to re-elect Congressman Oberstar if he votes for healthcare legislation that includes federal government funding of abortion (36% would be much less likely)

ND-AL Earl Pomeroy

80% oppose using tax dollars to pay for abortions (62% strongly oppose)
79% oppose taxpayer funding of abortions as part of healthcare reform (62% strongly oppose)
73% agree that abortion and abortion funding have no place in healthcare legislation (58% strongly agree)
57% would be less likely to vote to re-elect Congressman Pomeroy if he votes for healthcare legislation that includes federal government funding of abortion (42% would be much less likely)

OH-01 Steve Driehaus

73% oppose using tax dollars to pay for abortions (61% strongly oppose)
72% oppose taxpayer funding of abortions as part of healthcare reform (62% strongly oppose)
64% agree that abortion and abortion funding have no place in healthcare legislation (52% strongly agree)
55% would be less likely to vote to re-elect Congressman Driehaus if he votes for healthcare legislation that includes federal government funding of abortion (45% would be much less likely)

OH-06 Charlie Wilson

80% oppose using tax dollars to pay for abortions (65% strongly oppose)
79% oppose taxpayer funding of abortions as part of healthcare reform (66% strongly oppose)
74% agree that abortion and abortion funding have no place in healthcare legislation (61% strongly agree)
64% would be less likely to vote to re-elect Congressman Wilson if he votes for healthcare legislation that includes federal government funding of abortion (51% would be much less likely)

OH-09 Marcy Kaptur

67% oppose using tax dollars to pay for abortions (52% strongly oppose)
66% oppose taxpayer funding of abortions as part of healthcare reform (52% strongly oppose)
61% agree that abortion and abortion funding have no place in healthcare legislation (45% strongly agree)
47% would be less likely to vote to re-elect Congresswoman Kaptur if he votes for healthcare legislation that includes federal government funding of abortion (38% would be much less likely)

OH-16 John Boccieri

80% oppose using tax dollars to pay for abortions (67% strongly oppose)
79% oppose taxpayer funding of abortions as part of healthcare reform (67% strongly oppose)
71% agree that abortion and abortion funding have no place in healthcare legislation (60% strongly agree)
62% would be less likely to vote to re-elect Congressman Boccieri if he votes for healthcare legislation that includes federal government funding of abortion (50% would be much less likely)

PA-03 Kathy Dahlkemper

79% oppose using tax dollars to pay for abortions (64% strongly oppose)
78% oppose taxpayer funding of abortions as part of healthcare reform (64% strongly oppose)
69% agree that abortion and abortion funding have no place in healthcare legislation (58% strongly agree)
65% would be less likely to vote to re-elect Congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper if he votes for healthcare legislation that includes federal government funding of abortion (50% would be much less likely)

PA-04 Jason Altmire

76% oppose using tax dollars to pay for abortions (61% strongly oppose)
74% oppose taxpayer funding of abortions as part of healthcare reform (63% strongly oppose)
64% agree that abortion and abortion funding have no place in healthcare legislation (54% strongly agree)
58% would be less likely to vote to re-elect Congressman Altmire if he votes for healthcare legislation that includes federal government funding of abortion (46% would be much less likely)

PA-11 Paul Kanjorski

71% oppose using tax dollars to pay for abortions (55% strongly oppose)
68% oppose taxpayer funding of abortions as part of healthcare reform (55% strongly oppose)
62% agree that abortion and abortion funding have no place in healthcare legislation (46% strongly agree)
53% would be less likely to vote to re-elect Congressman Kanjorski if he votes for healthcare legislation that includes federal government funding of abortion (39% would be much less likely)

PA-14 Mike Doyle

65% oppose using tax dollars to pay for abortions (46% strongly oppose)
63% oppose taxpayer funding of abortions as part of healthcare reform (48% strongly oppose)
52% agree that abortion and abortion funding have no place in healthcare legislation (40% strongly agree)
44% would be less likely to vote to re-elect Congressman Doyle if he votes for healthcare legislation that includes federal government funding of abortion (27% would be much less likely)

RI-02 James Langevin

80% oppose using tax dollars to pay for abortions (66% strongly oppose)
78% oppose taxpayer funding of abortions as part of healthcare reform (66% strongly oppose)
53% agree that abortion and abortion funding have no place in healthcare legislation (38% strongly agree)
45% would be less likely to vote to re-elect Congressman Langevin if he votes for healthcare legislation that includes federal government funding of abortion (34% would be much less likely)

Pro Life Hero Defies Party and Vows to Continue Fight

Posted on January 7, 2010 by Guest

The New York Times today has a fascinating profile of Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan. Most readers of St. Michael Society are aware that Rep. Stupak is a pro-life hero, especially during the healthcare debate. His principled stand in the House of Representatives resulted in the passage of a truly pro-life amendment, which is attached to the House healthcare bill. The profile details the many attacks, some personal, hurled at Rep. Stupak.

Blessed are ye when they shall revile you, and persecute you, and speak all that is evil against you, untruly, for my sake: Be glad and rejoice, for your reward is very great in heaven. For so they persecuted the prophets that were before you. – Matthew 5:11-12

Now the House and Senate will attempt to reconcile the two bills passed in each chamber. Rep. Stupak claims he has 10 or 11 other pro-life Democrats willing to stand with him to ensure that if any legislation passes it will be pro-life. Look for the attacks and pressure to escalate from pro-abortion forces. Leadership will attempt to pry away votes with bribes, threats and attacks. Projects and funding will be dangled in front of their noses. Others will be threatened with removal of key committee assignments.

For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul? – Matthew 16:26

But for the special few, among them Rep. Stupak, the personal attacks will come. Let’s pray for them. Pray that they remain strong and courageous in this fight.

Saint Michael the Archangel,
defend us in battle.
Be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil.
May God rebuke him, we humbly pray;
and do Thou, O Prince of the Heavenly Host -
by the Divine Power of God -
cast into hell, satan and all the evil spirits,
who roam throughout the world seeking the ruin of souls.

Amen.

Updated- Senate to Vote on Gov’t Funding of Abortion Today

Posted on December 8, 2009 by KHernandez

UPDATED: Senate tables the Nelson-Hatch amendment 54-45,(Dem Senators Conrad, Bayh, Casey, Pryor, Dorgan, and Nelson voted in favor). Statements for the media from pro-life leaders are below. And the Family Research Council is holding a news conference call @ 6:05pm ET on the vote – call 866-939-3921 .

STATEMENTS FROM PRO-LIFE LEADERS ON THE VOTE TO TABLE THE NELSON-HATCH AMENDMENT
December 8, 2009

Tony Perkins
President of Family Research Council Action
“In rejecting the Nelson-Hatch amendment, pro-abortion Senators have broken the three decade long truce over government funding of abortion and have demonstrated they would rather have mandate federal funding for abortion than enact ‘health care reform.’

Wendy Wright
President, Concerned Women for America
“Nelson-Hatch is a reasonable amendment that does one thing: ensures federal funds are not spent on elective abortions. What the government funds, we get more of. Without this amendment, the bill will violate two of Pres. Obama’s promises: that the bill will not fund abortion and that he will work to reduce abortions. Since abortion costs less than delivery of a baby, it is not unlikely that bureaucrats, facing pressure to reduce costs, will sign off on paying for abortion but not for the health care that pregnant women and their babies need. If the bill does not explicitly bar the funding of abortion, bureaucrats and activist judges will require federal funding of this deadly procedure. If more children are aborted, who will pay for this massive government entitlement when it balloons in 20 years?”

Douglas Johnson
Legislative Director, National Right to Life Committee
“The focus now shifts to the all-important cloture vote on the Reid bill itself, which is a 60-vote hurdle. Let the message be heard clearly across the land: Any senator who votes for cloture on Reid’s bill is voting to establish two big new federal programs that will subsidize abortion on demand.”

Charmaine Yoest
President, Americans United for Life Action
“A vote to table the amendment is a vote against the Nelson-Hatch-Casey amendment. A majority of Senators effectively endorsed the abortion lobby’s goal of mainstreaming abortion as health care. The Senate health care reform bill explicitly allows the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services to include abortion coverage in the ‘community health insurance option,’ and allows federal subsidies to go to private insurance plans that include abortion coverage. In addition, the bill also requires that at least one private plan in each exchange provide coverage for all abortions. The Senate had the opportunity to follow the House’s lead in ensuring that federal dollars are not used to pay for abortions. Instead, the Senate chose to reject the Nelson-Hatch-Casey amendment and continue down the road towards unprecedented federal funding of abortion.”

Ashley Horne
Federal Issues Analyst, Focus on the Family Action
“Today, the U.S. Senate failed to protect the preborn and ignored the will of the people they represent. Although 67 percent of Americans oppose the use of federal money to pay for abortion in any government-run healthcare, Senators nevertheless rejected the Hatch-Nelson amendment. Their vote would compel Americans who have moral and religious objects to abortion – and who now make up the majority of the country – to fund it. This is what Thomas Jefferson described as ‘tyrannical.’ Focus on the Family continues to oppose the health care bill because it fails to protect the most vulnerable among us – the preborn. We will keep working diligently to ensure that this faulty legislation does not pass by giving a voice to the millions of Americans who oppose the use of federal funds to pay for abortion.”

Steven Ertelt
Editor and CEO, LifeNews.com
“Senators who opposed the Nelson amendment should be ashamed of themselves for hypocritically calling for ‘choice’ yet forcing Americans to pay for abortions through the health care bill. Their real agenda is exposed through their own votes — they want unlimited abortions throughout pregnancy for any reason funded by the American people. That’s not pro-choice, it is radically pro-abortion.”

Jennifer Giroux
Executive Director, One More Soul
“Senators think they can dress up abortion and call it ‘healthcare’ but today God fearing American tax-payers have now been forced to pay for an infant holocaust for the first time in our nation’s history.”

_____________________________

Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS) described the debate this afternoon in the Senate on the Nelson-Hatch Amendment, which makes sure the government doesn’t fund abortions, as “unusual.” Why? Because the debate is supposed to be about healthcare, not abortion, and certainly not about abortion funding, especially since it has been precedent for the past 30 years that the government does not fund elective abortion.

What’s the big deal? The abortion industry has a lot to gain if the government starts funding abortion, as Charmaine Yoest writes in her open letter to Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards today:

“This Senate health care bill is a bailout for the world’s largest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood. Their lobbying efforts are said to be about empowering women and advancing reproductive health but the bottom line is that Planned Parenthood needs the business.”

The Senate, by most accounts, will vote this afternoon on the Nelson-Hatch amendment. Have you called your Senator and told them to vote in favor of the Nelson amendment and against government funding of abortion?

Go HERE for contact info for your Senators.

Need talking points? Here are the main points we are using below. Feel free to send them to your family and friends and get the word out.

1) If the Senate healthcare bill is passes without Stupak or Nelson language, it will be the largest expansion of abortion since Roe v. Wade.

Senators must be urged to vote against any procedure or bill that does not include language identical to either the Nelson or Stupak Amendments, which prevent the government from funding abortion.
Abortion is not healthcare, as the abortion industry would like Americans to believe, and it should not be mandated under any health insurance plan, especially one that Americans will be forced to subsidize.

2) Government-Run Health Care = a bailout of the abortion industry, mandated government-funded abortion, and forcing Americans to subsidize abortions.

Americans don’t want this. Recent national polls have all showed Americans don’t support government-funded abortions by wide margins.
The proposed “public plan” would pay for elective abortions, which would be direct funding of elective abortion with federal funds. This abortion coverage would not be optional – no one would be able to enroll in federal insurance plan without paying an abortion surcharge.
In addition, the federal government would subsidize the purchase of private health plans that cover elective abortion on demand — departing from decades of federal policy, under which health plans that cover elective abortions (for example, those covering federal employees) are not eligible for federal subsidies.

3) The bi-partisan Stupak-Pitts amendment and the Nelson-Hatch amendment do not change the status quo on abortion funding through the government; it IS the status quo. They both mirror the Hyde amendment which prevents the government from funding elective abortion.

Small Crowd of Pro-Choicers Rally: Want You to Pay for Abortions

Posted on December 2, 2009 by KHernandez

Planned Parenthood Pres Cecile Richards & a pregnant woman with the word "planned' written across her belly

The abortion industry took to Capitol Hill today to rally the troops to make sure that the government funds abortion in healthcare. St. Michael Society editors infiltrated the Stop Stupak rally and got to hear and see first hand what the pro-abortion side is up to.

Between bashing the Stupak and Hyde amendment and literally hissing at any mention of the government not paying for abortion, the crowd cheered Cecile Richards and an abortionist who works at Planned Parenthood in DC. They loved it when Rep. Diana Degette (D-CO) said “HELL, NO” to voting for any type of bill that contains the Stupak Amendment and they went wild for Rep. Jerry Adler (D-NY) when he said that the pro-choice movement will not forgive a Member who votes for any type of Stupak language this time around.

We have photos and a video below from the rally and here is a link to several statements from pro-life leaders.

A video response from Kristan Hawkins of Students for Life America is also below.

Rally for the Abortion Industry –

Kristan Hawkins of Students for Life of America-

Join Our Mailing List

Backing Up Bart

Posted on October 23, 2009 by KHernandez

Healthcare reform is coming down to the wire and the Associated Press notes this morning that abortion is indeed dividing House Democrats. Speaker Nancy Pelosi is pulling out all the stops to make sure she has the votes she needs to pass a healthcare reform bill – and to make sure that abortion will be paid for by government dollars.

But one Democratic Congressman is doing everything he can to make sure that doesn’t happen. Congressman Bart Stupak, a Democrat from Michigan and a Catholic, is bucking his party leaders and standing up for the unborn. He has an amendment that says in plain language no government funds will be used to fund abortion through healthcare.

In fact, Stupak’s amendment (Congressman Joe Pitts (R-PA) is the co-sponsor) is the onlyway that abortion will be excluded from the healthcare bill.

Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) says that the Dems have done everything they can to make sure abortion is not included in healthcare. Um….right. Then why did you vote down at least 5 different amendments in committee that would have explicitly included abortion? Oh right, because you have 100% pro-abortion vote rating from NARAL.

But what about the Hyde Amendment, doesn’t that already make sure the government doesn’t fund abortions? Nope, it sure doesn’t. Want to read why? See here and here.

How It’s Going to Go Down

Since Congress is ultimately a governing body and makes laws, it means sometimes they do complicated things that we members of the general public could care less about. However, this time we have to pay attention.

Congressman Stupak’s amendment must be allowed on the House floor for a vote to make sure abortion is excluded from healthcare. But pro-abortion Catholic Speaker Nancy Pelosi has to give the okay to let it go to the floor.

Stupak made is clear to Pelosi that unless his amendment comes to the floor for a vote, he will vote with the Republicans to stop the debate on the health care bill – which has to happen for the giant, massive H.R. 3200 to come to the floor for a vote at all.

If Stupak and his pro-life Democrat colleagues are successful in stopping the House from adopting the rules for debate, Pelosi may not be able to have a vote at all on healthcare reform. The Associated Press story this morning says that Stupak may very well have the votes to do that.

Pelosi and her pro-choice allies have repeatedly said that abortion is not included in healthcare reform. If they are so confident, why not let a specific exclusion of abortion be included in the bill?

What can you do?

1) Thank Congressman Stupak for standing up for the unborn. He’s in a difficult position and is doing the right thing. Send him a note here.

2) Contact Speaker Pelosi’s office and tell her to allow a vote on Congressman Stupak’s amendment. Contact her office here.

Mexico City Policy to be made permanent?

Posted on October 21, 2009 by KHernandez

Following the rescissions and the reinstatements of the Mexico City Policy as new Presidents are elected in the United States is like watching a tennis match – the US funds overseas abortion, the US doesn’t, the US funds overseas abortions, the US doesn’t….

The Mexico City Policy requires foreign non-governmental organizations to certify that they will not promote and perform abortion as a method of family planning.

For pro-lifers and those who don’t like to see US tax dollars paying for abortions abroad, a Republican presidency is always most welcome since they usually reinstate the Mexico City Policy. Presidents Reagan and both Bushes attached it all international family planning funding. Obama Signing Mexico City Policy

Rescinding the provision was one of President Obama’s first acts as US President, which now lets our tax dollars go to funding abortions all across the world.

But one lawmaker is threatening to stop the tennis match and make Mexico City a permanent law, which means that American taxpayers will ALWAYS fund abortion overseas, no matter who is in office.

Senate Bill 1434 includes an amendment offered by Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) to permanently amend the Foreign Assistance Act, so that no future President may impose the Mexico City Policy. If his amendment is accepted, no future President will be able to stop our tax dollars from funding international abortions.

What can you do about it?

Tell your Senator to vote against the Lautenberg amendment. At a time when homes are being foreclosed and Americans can’t pay their bills, how does your Senator justify sending your tax dollars overseas to pay for abortions?

Tell Senator Lautenberg to withdraw his amendment.

US Bishops: Ready to Oppose Healthcare If Principles Aren’t Met

Posted on October 8, 2009 by KHernandez

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USSCB) made it crystal clear today that current healthcare legislation does NOT mean their concerns of: 1) making sure government funds do not pay for abortions and 2) that conscience rights are protected.

It gets better.

The bishops say in this new letter that they will continue to work with Congress but -

“If final legislation does not meet our principles, we will have no choice but to oppose the bill.”

The USSCB has always advocated for some type of healthcare reform since Catholic moral teachings say that physical health is a gift entrusted to us by God. Here’s what the Catechism says:

2288: We must take reasonable care of [life and physical health], taking into account the needs of others and the common good. Concern for the health of its citizens requires that society help in the attainment of living-conditions that allow them to grow and reach maturity: food and clothing, housing, health care, basic education, employment, and social assistance. [emphasis mine]

But the killing of the unborn come above anything else, as it should. Abortion is a grave moral evil and making healthcare out to be a moral right, which many have done, should never include the government funding of such an act.

The Bishops aren’t fooled by the clever rhetoric of the Obama Administration and the phony compromises put forth by pro-abortion Members of Congress.

See the full letter from the bishops here: www.usccb.org/sdwp/national/2009-10-08-healthcare-letter-congress.pdf.

Congressman Stupak – A Thorn in Pelosi’s Side

Posted on October 6, 2009 by KHernandez

Congressman Bart Stupak, a Catholic Democrat from Michigan, deserves accolades for holding his ground on an issue that the majority of Americans oppose: having the government pay for abortions through healthcare reform.

Congressman Bart Stupak

William McGurn nails it in his column today, suggesting that Stupak is the new Bob Casey problem for the Democratic party. Bob Casey, the late pro-life governor of Pennsylvania, was famously denied a speaking slot at the 1992 Democratic convention, while the party easily found slots for pro-choice Republicans. McGurn notes that the “moment helped tar the Democrats as a party of abortion intolerance—a problem the party thought it put behind it in 2006 when the governor’s son, Democrat Robert Casey Jr., was elected senator as a pro-life Democrat.”

But party leaders are making the mistake all over again and now, “Just like Gov. Casey before him, Mr. Stupak’s stand for life—in this case, his fight against tax dollars for abortion—is making him a thorn in the side of a Democratic president.”

Here’s the kicker – remember President Obama’s speech at Notre Dame earlier this year (yes, I’d rather forget it happened as well)? The President almost convincingly urged everyone to find “common ground” to “reduce the number of women seeking abortions.”

Mr. President, where’s the ‘common ground’ when your party and its leaders are about to force Americans to pay for abortions through massive healthcare reform?

Rep. Stupak is fighting to get an explicit exclusion of abortion written into healthcare legislation but his party won’t even let him bring his amendment to the floor for a vote, which stands in stark contrast to Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s own words that “no Member of Congress should be silenced on the floor.”

Now Stupak is making sure that Speaker Pelosi and President Obama know he’s serious:

Last week Mr. Stupak, 24 other Democrats and 158 Republicans sent the speaker a letter asking her to make good on that pledge. Members of the House, they said, should have the “right to vote their conscience on an amendment offered by Congressmen Stupak and [Joe] Pitts [R., Pa.] regarding government funding for abortion.”

Does he have enough votes to get the exclusion written into the bill? McGurn says that no ones knows yet if he’s got the votes to block the healthcare bill if he’s not allowed to offer his amendment but you have to believe he’s close – both Speaker Pelosi and President Obama have personally reached out to him.

Bart Stupak is truly a hero – standing up against his own party and fighting for those who have no voice. He wants healthcare reform to pass, just not at the expense of the government paying for abortions.

Go here to send a message of encouragement to Rep. Stupak.

Abortion a Stumbling Block for Healthcare Reform?

Posted on October 2, 2009 by admin

No one fooled by Capps Amendment…Rep. Bart Stupak holding his ground…Dems working on 2^nd phony amendment…

Whenever the liberal Dems are pressed on whether or not abortion is funded by government dollars through healthcare, they often point back to the Capps Amendment in the House bill, which they say makes sure gov dollars aren’t spent on elective abortions. Of course, unless they are Nancy Pelosi, who doublespeaks when asked about it this summer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOMDyvVJad0.

Fortunately for the majority of Americans who don’t want the government to fund abortions through healthcare, Congressman Bart Stupak, a Democrat from Michigan, is holding his ground against President Obama and Nancy Pelosi. Stupak is pushing for an explicit exclusion of abortion to be written into healthcare legislation – and if he doesn’t get it, he says he’s got 40 votes against healthcare reform, something that Pelosi just can’t afford.

US News & World Report has a great Q&A with Stupak on his recent phone call with President Obama on abortion funding in healthcare. The gist is that Stupak is holding his ground and refuses to concede that the Capps Amendment prohibits gov money from paying for abortion.

So what to do now?

Well, Rep. Henry Waxman, the chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and who has a pro-choice voting record even Nancy Pelosi would be envious of, wants to come up with a “compromise” with some of the more moderate members of Stupak’s coalition (read: former-pro-lifer-but-still-portrayed-as-pro-lifer Rep. Tim Ryan). He wants to strip away Stupak’s support bit by bit till he has the votes needed to pass a phony compromise, claim victory and hand the bill over to Pelosi. Rep. Diana DeGette, a Colorado Democrat, admitted as much.

Doug Johnson, the legislative director at National Right to Life, blows up the rhetoric once again:

”Pelosi and Waxman are working on cosmetic changes to the Capps Amendment, which they will then try to peddle as an even-more-generous ‘compromise’ by the pro-abortion side (but which in reality will put the federal government into the elective abortion business in both the public plan and the premium subsidy program).”

Johnson also says that even if the House members adopt the new Waxman language, it doesn’t alleviate the concern of abortion funding found in the public option. In fact, the government option “problem is very important and separate and distinct from the premium-subsidy problem.”

TIME Magazine, the independent FactCheck.org and the Associated Press, among others, have all confirmed that abortion will be paid for using government dollars with the current healthcare plan.

For more info on the Capps Amendment and other talking points, see www.StopTheAbortionMandate.com.

Setback Today but the Fight is Not Over

Posted on September 30, 2009 by admin

It’s important to remember that this fight is not over but sadly as expected the amendments to restrict public funding of abortion and conscience protection failed today in the Senate Finance Committee. There are more options in the Senate and pro lifers there plan to keep up this fight. On the House side, earlier this week 183 Members of Congress sent a bipartisan letter to Speaker Pelosi asking for a vote the Stupak-Pitts amendments.

Great coverage here by Steven Ertelt at LifeNews. http://www.lifenews.com/nat5521.html

“The Hatch nondiscrimination amendment failed by a vote of 13-10 with pro-abortion Sen. Olympia Snow, a Maine Republican, siding with Democrats on the panel to oppose the measure.

Sen. Kent Conrad, a North Dakota Democrat, joined Republicans in supporting the amendment.”

St Michael Society

Defending and Promoting the Faith in the Public Square

Tag Archives: Amendments