Thanks David. Sounds like pro-choice Dems will fold under Barry’s Executive Order.

I’m not objective on this issue, since I have always been a strong supporter of choice. If I were not pro-choice, my seven daughters would have browbeatened me into that position.

To me, abortion is part of health care. I oppose government intrusion into private rights by trying to ban it or impose barriers . Since is a legal medical procedure, it should be equally entitled to government funding.

Putting those views aside, I find it unconscionable to inject this issue into a measure to reform our health care system. Whether Bart Stupak and others are grandstanding or being fanatic, they are hurting the cause unnecessarily since there is only a convoluted argument of a risk of a government subsidy of abortion in this legislation. If they want to confront such a subsidy, let them attack the tax deduction for employer plans, a huge benefit of millions of dollars.

Every day, Americans lose health benefits, suffer financial ruin, get sicker, or die because of inadequate health care. To throw a roadblock into reform is hardly a pro-life action.

homer http://www.altara.blogspot.com

If this doesn’t give a wake-up call to the pro-choice movement to make sure that their members vote single-issue in November, this issue might have been won by the antis. Executive orders can be undone under a different Congress more easily than legislation can be undone. Democrats have tolerated too many pro-life or swing positions on this issue in order to swing Republican districts. It very well might be the case that Republican voters who are pro-choice (there are a handful, maybe more) will vote this fall for this single issue given the teapartization of the GOP, but I’m not holding my breath.

An’ maybe ol’ “Barry” can print a big DUH above his signature——invisible ink, perhaps…?

Please don’t call them pro-life. They’re not pro-life by any stretch, they’re pro death penalty, pro war and anti sex. Think about it– would you say that you’re not pro-life, if one of them asked you? The correct answer is “yes, I really am pro-life, unlike the phony anti-abortion crowd.”.

Politco is reporting the Dems have the 216 votes:
http://www.politico.com/politico44/
There is, however a caveat ( isn’t there always?) so, here we go, straight into the arms of The Corporation

I’d prolly do it just to escape with my life!

There is no way that Loretta sinks this bill. She has ambitions for either California governor or Senate seat and talking down Obama administration would be the end of those dreams.

A call from Bill Clinton should be able to change her mind, if needed.

Whoops. Got sucked into the media term. You are right.

War, death penalty, poverty, anti-healthcare — not pro-life.

More and more this looks like Rahm painting a target on the backs of house dems so Obama won’t have to pretend he’s a democrat any more. Wonder if campaign funding will dry up for them in Nov? A perfect storm, and they fell for it.

Minor correction: it’s John Larson if you’re talking about the Rep. from CT-1, not “Larsen”.

I dont understand something- if an executive order can ensure that Stupak’s requirement is met, can future Republican presidents say that there can be no abortion coverage in plans on the exchange.

We don’t know the deal, but it seems the current ‘dem’ president might be doing that.

Agreed — wouldn’t be surprised at all if they roped her back in. I thought about it for quite a while which column to assign her to, but since Roll Call said leadership had her in the “no” column, decided to go with that.

Posted this on OL, it’s as applicable here as well. Jane, company, comments?

—–

Let’s stop before the vote and think about the next step in HCR. If the bill passes, what’s the next step in the process of fixing what was passed? If it fails, what is the next step then? A scaled down plan B from Obama, or Grayson’s Medicare for All bill?

We always get this extreme myopia about “votes” and the fate of individual bills. This is not a smart way to plan a movement and get to your eventual goal. They can tie you up in votes for months, what we lack is a plan regardless of success/failure of any one bill. Hate the right all you want, but the abortion folks don’t care about any one vote, they always have backup plans and never cease to push for the overall goal. It’s allowed them to move the goalposts all the way back to Roe vs Wade over the last few decades. Is HCR less important to us than abortion is to them?

So what do people here see as our plan? No matter what happens at 3 pm today, everyone knows this fight is not over. Please enlighten us with your insight.

Obama campaign staff, December 2007 (via RH Reality Check):

Does Sen. Obama support the Hyde amendment? Under what circumstances does he believe that Medicaid should cover abortions (all pregnancies, life- or health-threatening pregnancies, pregnancies that are a result of rape or incest, extreme fetal malformation)?

Obama does not support the Hyde amendment. He believes that the federal government should not use its dollars to intrude on a poor woman’s decision whether to carry to term or to terminate her pregnancy and selectively withhold benefits because she seeks to exercise her right of reproductive choice in a manner the government disfavors.

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2007/12/21/sen-barack-obamas-reproductive-health-questionnaire

I can’t find the link, but someone posted a link last night that Grayson withdrew his “Sucker send yer money!” Act. Myself, I plan to laugh at dems during their concession speeches.

What more can I do?