House Democrats in the Pro-Choice Caucus are relishing the opportunity to blast out that George Washington University study showing that the Stupak amendment would have industry-wide implications and would effectively end abortion services coverage in health insurance over time.

Diana DeGette, co-chair of the caucus and the most public member of the opposition to the Stupak amendment, just sent along an FAQ on the Stupak amendment that incorporates some of the GW study’s findings, and cites the study by name.

“The Stupak-Pitts restrictions on a woman’s right to choose are dangerous and unprecedented,” said DeGette. “They go far beyond current law by telling women they cannot use their own private dollars to purchase a health insurance plan that offers a full-range of reproductive services. The health care bill should be about providing health care to over 36 million Americans – not about further restricting a women’s right to choose.”

DeGette reiterated the study in saying that the notion of a supplemental “rider” for abortion services won’t work. As the study noted, in the five states that currently require supplemental riders for this kind of coverage, “there is no evidence” that insurance companies actually offer them, and it wouldn’t make any business sense for them to offer it either – “if only women of childbearing age purchase such a rider then the premium for the rider will likely cost almost as much as the service.”

DeGette also explained how the private insurance market would gradually drop abortion services coverage in their own plans outside the insurance exchange, citing “A recent report by the George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services (which) found that Stupak-Pitts ‘is likely to have consequences that reach far beyond its supposedly intended scope.’ The report concludes that ‘the treatment exclusions required under the Stupak/Pitts Amendment will have an industry-wide effect, eliminating coverage of medically indicated abortions over time for all women, not only those whose coverage is derived through a health insurance exchange.’”

DeGette also noted that Stupak flat-out lied on Hardball yesterday when he said that the original House bill didn’t involve segregation of funds:

CLAIM: The original House bill allows federal funding to be used for abortions.

REALITY: The original House bill preserves current law in the health insurance Exchange and establishes a segregation mechanism that would require insurance companies to reserve private premium dollars to cover abortions separate from any affordability credits. This is in keeping with longstanding federal policy that requires segregation of funds in order to permit religious organizations to accept federal funds.

In an interview with Brian Beutler, DeGette expanded on the impact of the GW study.

“Certainly if it doesn’t confirm my suspicions about the intent, it concerns my suspicions about the effect the Stupak amendment would have,” DeGette said. “What the findings show are that women who want to purchase policies with their own money–with their own premiums–will not be able to buy insurance policies…. That’s frankly the intention of the anti-choice movement now.”

DeGette intimated that pro-life Democrats are feeling remorse over voting for the Stupak amendment, that it went much further than they anticipated. She predicted a positive resolution on the issue.

MoveOn.org now has an action item up rallying their members against the Stupak amendment.