Thread: Pro-choice movement dealt serious blow with passage of Stupak amendment

You really are defending this amendment with all your passion.

not in November of 2009....for the past 7 months democrats have been fighting democrats instead of fighting republicans.

then no Dems in those seats. Perhaps he was correct in that those types were the only ones that could get elected but I think we should offer people a chance to vote for a liberal. Sometimes they surprise you.

I hope they are all challenged by progressives ~ even in so-called Republican areas.

He's a good guy. But I get what you're saying.

Ms. Pelosi

because it doesn't do anything except provide political cover, and that didn't even work, because many of those that voted for the amendment did not in turn vote for the bill. However, I reject the idea that the amendment restricts access to health care in any new way, or expands Hyde in some way, or makes abortions less legal in some way, than has already been done way back in 1977. It's just wrong. It isn't the truth. We...

Yesterday, in a different colloquy, you asked me where I "got this stuff," meaning where did I get the impression ANY insurance policies could be offered outside of the exchanges, and thus would be exempt from Stupak restrictions. Heaven help me, but I read the bill tonight; Section 301 of the bill makes participation in the exchanges voluntary by using the word "facilitate" instead of "mandate" (or a similar...

Just off the bat: "most private insurers cover abortion related services but that practice will cease if Stupak's amendment remains in the finalized version of the legislation".... SPIN, there's no reason that private insurers can't offer the same plans. "new restrictions on a woman's right to choose".... SPIN, the federal funding restriction is from the 70's. "no one would be forced to lose...