NP Rank:
Abortion a big obstacle in Senate healthcare reform debate
In the US Senate, opponents of abortion are looking to enact tough restrictions within the health care reform bill. This may make it difficult to pass the bill before January.
Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., has said Monday he will under no conditions support any bill which does not prohibit federal funding of abortions.
The House-passed restrictions were the price Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., had to pay to get a health care bill passed, on a narrow 220-215 vote. But it's prompted an angry backlash from liberals at the core of her party, and some are now threatening to vote against a final bill if the curbs stay in.Obama said the legislation needs to find a balance.
"I want to make sure that the provision that emerges meets that test — that we are not in some way sneaking in funding for abortions, but, on the other hand, that we're not restricting women's insurance choices," Obama said in an interview with ABC News.
Senate Democrats will need Nelson's vote — and those of at least a half-dozen other abortion opponents in their caucus. They face a grueling debate against Republicans who are unified in their opposition to a sweeping remake of the health care system. It's unclear how the abortion opponents would line up; the pressure on them will intensify once the legislation is on the floor.
Former President Bill Clinton, whose failed effort to revamp the health care system contributed to the Republican takeover of the House and Senate in 1994, was expected to speak to Senate Democrats about health care legislation during their weekly caucus on Tuesday, officials said. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss his schedule.
And many believe that the issue of abortion is a "make or break" one: And interestingly, it is the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, so anti-abortion in its ideology, who have been one of the biggest proponents of universal healthcare coverage as a basic right to life issue.
Antiabortion groups like the Family Research Council and Focus on the Family Action have spent the last month pummeling Democratic healthcare reform proposals over abortion coverage. They've attacked the House Democrats' healthcare bill, for instance, for leaving the door open to abortion coverage in the public health insurance option and for using federal funds to underwrite private healthcare plans that cover abortion. But conservative Christian groups have also made little secret of their opposition to the very idea of a greater government role in healthcare, the abortion controversy aside. A recent E-mail update from the Family Research Council blasted President Obama's push for healthcare reform without ever mentioning abortion. "The American people," it said, ". . . don't want healthcare delivered with the empathy of the IRS, the efficiency of FEMA, or the mismanagement of the post office."
NowPublic on Facebook
Crowd Power
-
Susan Marie Kovalinsky
Ledgewood, New Jersey, United States
Recommendations (25)
-
Hugh Askew
Omaha, Nebraska, United States -
Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke
Redwater, Alberta, Canada -
a211423
Clearlake, California, United States 
Anonymous user





Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (6)
at 06:02 on November 10th, 2009
"Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., has said Monday he will under no conditions support any bill which does not prohibit federal funding of abortions."
Ben's my man, got my vote.
at 09:13 on November 10th, 2009
I'm sure it will sit well with women that want the government making reproductive health care choices for them. This isn't about abortion. It is about making health care more difficult for women. I'm surprised the Catholic Bishops aren't complaining about Viagra being covered as a "medication."
at 10:55 on November 10th, 2009
Hopefully, it will get hamstrung badly enough as to be unable to limp to a vote.
"think it is their right to make that decision or not."
Okay for women to have the right to kill an unborn child, but not okay for folks to make choices about having - or not having - health care.
Makes perfect sense to me.
at 14:23 on November 10th, 2009
How elitist for people to care about the less fortunate, that we may all share in the burden of providing for them.
at 14:52 on November 10th, 2009
Interesting that more liberals don't dig into their own pockets to help the less fortunate.
Wouldn't mind seeing John Kerry spend of few of his bucks to pay for health insurance for those that can't afford it. 'Course with his schedule and all, he likely can't be bothered.
at 15:20 on November 10th, 2009
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/gpr/10/1/gpr100112.html
If you are interested in the history of federal funding for abortions and where we stand now, this website is informative.
Wealthy and middle income women don't need Medicaid or health insurance to obtain an abortion. The real issue is how can the government control the lives of low income women. They are the penalized group here, not anyone else. So when we speak here of funding abortions, lets make it clear the group to whom we are addressing. And when legislators pontificate on the righteousness of not allowing a women choice, they are legislating against poor women.
Only 17 states currently are allowing pro choice abortions, so it's going to be a difficult challenge to pass health care reform without concessions. If the Senate has to use abortion as a compromise measure, then it must be. At least in my state, poor women can still get an abortion using MediCal, but there are 33 other states where they cannot.
Health Care Reform should not be contingent on whether or not to allow abortions, but if compromising on the issue gets it passed, then I would be in favor of it.