David,
Though this is very hopeful I have a hard time believing that they won’t horse trade women’s uteri away in conference. It’s a “bargaining chip,” dontcha know.

As usual, Digby puts her finger on it.

Likely?

Nice democracy you have there, shame if anything happened to it.

Why is it that the enemy have left the New England provinces, and made these middle ones the seat of war? The answer is easy: New England is not infested with Tories, and we are. I have been tender in raising the cry against these men, and used numberless arguments to show them their danger, but it will not do to sacrifice a world either to their folly or their baseness. The period is now arrived, in which either they or we must change our sentiments, or one or both must fall. And what is a Tory? Good God! What is he? I should not be afraid to go with a hundred Whigs against a thousand Tories, were they to attempt to get into arms. Every Tory is a coward; for servile, slavish, self-interested fear is the foundation of Toryism; and a man under such influence, though he may be cruel, never can be brave.

I didn’t really talk about conference, and I agree with my former colleague Digby on the politics. It’s definitely a bargaining chip now. But paradoxically, it’s going to be harder for anti-choice forces to get the amendment into the Senate bill.

won’t it need to be in the bill that comes out of conference to gain the same support in the House again?

At this moment, Bart Stupak owns my uterus. Where do I send the bill if my uterus needs some tweaking?

The Pope.

Nice little bill ya got there. Would be a shame if anything … happened to it ….

If you believe Diana DeGette, it would need to be OUT of the bill or else it risks losing another 40 votes at a minimum.

So we’re wondering if there are 20 Democrats who would vote with all 40 Republicans for such an amendment? I don’t even want to watch this train wreck. This is going to be church vs state, and I fear the church will win. Time to roll out the stories on molestation and coverup, and whatever weapon’s you’ve got.

On what Harry can do, I think there’s a good argument for excluding any mechanism that was explicitly voted down in both Finance and HELP, but I don’t think the rules require Reid to put in or take out anything. After all, there was no state opt out in either committee, but Harry wants it, so it’s reportedly in the merged bill.

McCaskill made clear she will accept Stupak if that’s what it takes to get a bill. So I hope no one’s counting on her.

I’ll be in Rome in the spring…..maybe I’ll stop by and spit on his red silk shoes.

And there you have it. When this garbage was inserted on Saturday, I was pissed but yesterday I began to think that these womb chasing House members got played on Saturday. This is as non-binding as it gets. This crap will be defeated on the Senate floor!

Do so for me as well.

Thank you. (feel free to change the “p” to an “h” too)

Harry Reid is anti-choice and you can be sure his Church will bring extraordinary pressure to bear on him to include Stupak language in the merged bill. And the other Church will bring extraordinary pressure to bear as well — the Bishops have already made their wishes known in the House, what’s to stop them from drawing a bright line in the Senate regarding communion as well?

when it comes to obsessing with and controlling poor women’s vaginas, the senate is very bipartisan. i expect the stupak amendment to be in the final bill.

I think and hope that you are right. The shame of all this is that it ever passed the House. What a bunch of stupid idiots. They will pay for this when they run again, IMO. The lack of respect for women is quite clear and we know who they are.

And that goes double for Obama.

Obama himself has weighed into the Stupak amendment debacle. He just gave an interview to ABC News and stated that he is against the language of the Stupak amendment.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/abc-news-exclusive-obama-jobs-health-care-ft/story?id=9033559

Digby overlooks that Stupak is a bargaining chip to further waterdown the PO and HCR as to render it useless other than an entitlement for corporate interests.

My guess, as others have said, is that Stupak was slipped in and NARAL, PP, and anyone else involved were told to back off by WH/Rahmobama so it can help in conference to water down HCR.

There will be no Stupak in the final bill Obama signs, and that and REFORM will be sung as praises for the Dem’s! And ’10 and ’12 will go swimmingly for Dem’s, as their story goes.

Only, NO ONE has counted on the blowback to bad HCR being passed, and signed, from the progs/libs. I think our blowback on this issue has been GREATLY under estimated.

On the other hand, Rhamobama and the corporate interests may have contingencies ready at hand to deal with THAT, as the campaign season begins.

Where was all this concern and outrage when the Hyde amendment passed? How often has it been revisited? Where was the opposition to Roberts and Alito who became the 4th and 5th Catholics on the Supreme Court? Now Sotomayor is the 6th. Where was all the concern when the ability the states to set severe limitations on availability of abortion was handed over?

The anti-abortion, anti-contraception people have been for years carrying out a very sophisticated operation to enfeeble Roe v Wade.

Yes. there has been some protest all along the way, mostly by older women and the wise and compassionate Firepup types. But for whatever failings of Planned Parenthood and NARAL they have overall had little support among the voters.

That said. I am heartened to see such spirited defenses for abortion rights stimulated by the Stupak outrage. But I do wonder how successful we can be in stemming the tide of apathy re abortion rights. Let’s prove my skepticism unwarranted,.

Tangential note: Chris Matthews is disgusting. I could hardly sit through the show this evening.

I remember when Obama said he wouldn’t support FISA.

You note that the Senate bill keeps the insurance industry anti-trust exemption. Does this mean we will have a mandate to purchase from this industry, without ANY protections against price manipulation?

Nope, not designed to be that.

Stupak is a chip, and one that will be hammered to water down House Bill, worse than it is.

IMHO.

Inquisitor has persuaded me today, with regard to this matter.

Grim, dark irony and humor.
Black as the daze of winter.
Bleak as our existence.

Funny, but bitterly true.

Well played, Twain.

But the trade off will neuter HCR, completely.

That’s how this was set up.

We’ll see, but I’m persuaded that’s what Stupak is all about.

A set up to water HCR down.

yes. that’s exactly what it means. you will be mandated to buy insurance and while they cannot deny you coverage for a pre-existing condition, they can ask you to pay an outrageous premium and cover only a small portion of costs when you make your claim.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marcia-angell-md/is-the-house-health-care_b_350190.html

The Bishops and the Catholic Church will get OTHER concessions from future legislation, and LOTS of tithing gifts from big biz.

Cuz they don’t really care about Stupak BEING enabled, just the appearance that anti abortion forces are on the march! They were bought and sold as much as our elected offals. They USED to do the buying, but corporate interests now FAR exceed their wealth, power and control.

But they remain a HUGE tool to be used by the corporate feudalists.

Just my take on it . . *G*

This is some beautiful political theatre!

He even gets to come out and publicly DECRY Stupak, which he and Rahm and The Bishops helped pull together.

Brilliant.

And again, it’s just a leverage chip WH/Obama created to water down PO and ensure corporate feudalists profit mightily in the end!

There’s yer multi-dimensional chess for ya . . .

Whether that was the specific intention of Stupak doesn’t matter, if not that, something else would have transformed HCR into naught but a big hairy turd. You will never be wrong expecting the worst from the crooks on the Hill.

60 votes in this Senate is not such a big hurdle to have the Stupid Amendment inserted. Do we forget who we are dealing with?

I would guess that Stupak is the means of eliminating ANY thought of repealing anti trust exemptions, any thought of eliminating extended patent issues for biologics, and more.

We’ll see. And we won’t know till Obama signs it.

Brutal, no matter WHAT we do, we get pushed more and more to the right, and give up more and more reforms.

Just brutal.

Not only will they bargain away the civil rights of women they will bargain away a robust public option for the general population. If only we could all be born into the plutocracy.

Well, given the Bishops On Da Hill, I have to think Stupak was the tool they created to further the watering down.

And I’m agreed with ya, WRT our elected offals.

Not only are there Vatican moles in Congress there are also Mormon moles.

Doesnt’ have to be inserted! Stupak is a tool! It’s in the House!

Senate does NOT have to bring it a final bill, whether the votes are there for a Stupak like amendment or are not, it don’t matter.

This isn’t about abortion rights, this is about leverage to waterdown HCR.

Ok, I guess I’ve said that enuff for today.

I blame Inquisitor (forget the specific handle) . . . his/her posit is way too compelling.

As always with Obama look to his actions, not his words. His actions reveal someone much more conservative than his words.

Having spent a little time in Mormon country (Utah), it was striking to see the high number of 19 and 20 year old married women with 2 children with them at the grocery store. Women are primarily breeders for Mormons,— just my take.

And you did know that Pelosi called the Roman Catholic Bishops and consulted with them about the House bill, didn’t you? First Amendment? Really?

See the link @ 38.

I think this statement is at a bare minimum way over the top. This kind of broad-brush bigotry is something one would hope not to find on a progressive blog.

Yes, you are right. With only three votes needed to switch to defeat the bill in House, if it is not included, it won’t get anywhere.

I have not doubt some Dems who voted for Stupak would vote for a conference bill that didn’t include it, but for certain there are at least three who will not vote for it.

It is just the price of the bill.

n rural areas it isn’t unusual for girls to get married within a year of leaving HS. Not just Mormons – it’s the ones not going to college, mostly.

On the repeal of the anti-trust exemption, which I am coming to think is the magic wand of health reform, is there any chance of this coming up in separate legislation? Or was it always tied to the farrago of health reform? It strikes me as absolutely essential if the costs are to be contained. There is no reason why the return on equity in the health business should be that much higher than in manufacturing tee-shirts. It’s not like they face any real risk!

They have to have children early, because by the time they are thirty, their husbands are beating them to a pulp, and they are unable to conceive.

Why would the Republicans need sixty votes?
The filibuster only applies against Democrats not Republicans.

I love Barbara Boxer and she repeated the claim this article does, but it’s only technically right. Reid said he does want to strengthen the anti-abortion language (just not as far-reaching as Stupak) and write it into the bill – I don’t think this is going to be a case of amendment.