Stupak Amendment Will Be Removed, Period.

[Lyric]

It HAS to be. Forty-one House Democrats have signed a letter vowing to vote against the final passage of the bill if it includes the Stupak Amendment or any OTHER amendment that restricts abortion access beyond what the current law already does. In fact, those initial 41 signatories were the ones who signed the letter at almost exactly the same time that the bill passed. The letter is still circulating around for more signatures, so there's a good chance that the 41 number will get bigger.

Assuming that we can take the opposition at its word (and on this issue, I think we can) basic mathematics can predict the outcome pretty easily. The number of Congresspeople who have vowed to vote against the bill if it includes anything like the Stupak Amendment would be MORE than enough to completely derail the bill when added to the Republicans who we already KNOW are going to vote against it; Obama and the House leadership know this. Obama isn't stupid. He's not going to let his bill die over something like this, and he's also not going to change minds about it. These people care enough about choice to draw a public line in the sand, and that kind of intense conviction is practically unshakable. Anti-choicers aren't the only ones who feel passionately about this issue, after all.

So, the Stupak Amendment won't be there in the end, and neither will anything else that resembles it. Unmarried low-income families are still thoroughly screwed (especially GLBT ones) but at least we won't be handing the psychotic right-wing an effortless anti-choice victory on a silver platter. At least women will still be able to choose an insurance plan that covers abortion. Or at least the ones who can afford the premiums, at any rate.

[amerstates]

1. ? They are 20% of Dems in the House!

Why are you dismissing the representation of the contituents of 20% of the House Dems? Don't they (we) have a voice?

[Lyric]

3. What on earth are you talking about?

Clarify, please?

[amerstates]

7. Over 40 Dems went along with Stupek; they represent REAL people don't they?

Those that supported Stupek did so because their constituents support Stupek. Perhaps you are unaware that 20% of Dems are not on board with the abortion laws of this country. Try to win any elections without us.

[CreekDog]

14. Don't be Stupek

I mean.

Nevermind. :D

[Lyric]

15. Sure, they represent real people. Just not the majority of people.

Did you think that in the House, the minority is supposed to win?

:crazy:

[cliffordu]

16. If you advocate limiting a woman's right to choose, maybe you need to go

thataway...--------->

The fucking party won't miss your sad ass at all.

Women are not brood mares or possessions, ya little shit.

[Warren DeMontague]

18. Perhaps you are unaware that THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS ARE PRO CHOICE.

The "abortion laws of this country" are the status quo; objections to the Stupak amendment, as I understand it, are based on it moving the status quo, re: private insurance more towards the anti-choice side of things. Although I am pro-choice, I don't think the health insurance bill is the place to wage the fight for reproductive choice. The health insurance reform bill is the place to reform (since we're obviously not going to eliminate, at least not yet) the for-profit insurance industry.

What our old corpulent friend Henry Hyde did years ago is still the law of the land; no fed $ can be used for abortions.

That being said, again, THE MAJORITY OF AMERICANS ARE PRO CHOICE.



try to win any elections without US. I dare you.

[kath]

20. RIght - a significant majority of Americans support legalized abortion, and they have done so

CONSISTENTLY, for DECADES, in every single poll that has been taken.

[elleng]

21. Their constituents didn't know anything about stupik, did they?

Degette explained the issues well today, I think, essentially saying the amendment would have a much broader effect than the current law (Hyde) that would get the attention of an enormous number of women.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x400719

[Zoeisright]

23. Mind your own fucking business.

If you don't like abortions, don't have one. Otherwise, get your big nose out of other people's lives.

And BTW, abortions are still LEGAL in this country. Go live in a repressive Islamic country if you don't think abortion should be legal.

Oh, and just so I can get your little panties more in a twist, abortion numbers STAY THE SAME whether it's legal or illegal. The only difference is that women and girls DIE when it's illegal. But that's just fine with you 'pro-life' crazies.

[robinlynne]

25. us? you are on the wrong board. WE, and there are 80,000 of us here, I think do NOT

think it is any of your business what we do with our own bodies.

[amerstates]

28. 80,000 is the number that registered. there are maybe 1,500 active people here, if that. NT

[HughMoran]

11. I think we've got a live one here

...that's what my search seems to have shown.

[robinlynne]

26. oh yeah! 10 posts. anti-choice.....

[Divine Discontent]

29. and even the search wasn't necessary! hehe...

[HughMoran]

4. We?

Huh?

[babylonsister]

13. Huh? You approve of this bill? 20%? And do you actually think

the representatives vote for their constituents? Check out the rethugs: 76% of Americans want a public option, yet not one rethug voted for it.

Please explain that, and welcome to DU, maybe.

[The Magistrate]

24. No, Ma'am, You Do Not

You do not get to dictate to the remainder of the caucus. The Progressive Caucus and the Pro-Choice caucus are both larger than the 'blue dog' rump. A compromise had been worked out weeks ago, which a clique of fundamentalist fanatics pitched a fit to over-turn at the last minute. Even when accommodated, most of these shit-heels still failed to vote for the bill. People like that cannot be dealy with; they have to be steam-rolled.

[Sebastian Doyle]

2. The quick mobilizatiion against the Stupak Stupidity is a great thing to see

and I sincerely hope their efforts are successful.

Now if only the same thing could be done to the "mandatory payments to the corporations who fucked up the system in the first place" part of the bill.......

[Forkboy]

5. If it's not removed the Democrats are slitting their own wrists.

[babylonsister]

8. Yep, and we all know it. That was a means to an end. The end has

been accomplished. Time for it to go away ASAP.

[Lyric]

10. If it's not removed, there's no bill.

Even if we get no more than the current 41 signatures, that's still enough to stop the bill from being passed. I highly doubt that Obama and the House leadership are going to say, "Oh well. It was worth a try!" and walk away. They'll fix it. They really don't have a choice.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

6. How much I hope you're right, my dear Lyric!

Your words give me hope.

K&R

[napi21]

9. The problem I see with your argument is...

1. How does this affect GLBT?

2. Abortions will still be OK for rape & incest.

3. Most of the people you're talking about who would have to pay for their own abortions can't afford insurance of any kind now! Why do you think they would magically be able to afford it if there is no bill?

[Lyric]

17. Okay, some clarity.

1. How does *what* affect GLBT? If you're talking about my comment at the bottom, then understand that I'm not referencing the Stupak Amendment there--I'm talking about the bill itself. Here's a thread from a few days ago that discusses this. It died without much comment, unfortunately. I guess it's not something anyone really wants to think about right now.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6959139&mesg_id=6959139

2. Nobody said that they wouldn't be. I'm not sure what you mean, here. When Stupak is removed, abortion coverage will remain available period--for rape & incest, and also overall.

3. Do you understand the problem with the Stupak Amendment? The problem is that it basically would have banned ANY insurance company from providing abortion coverage. Because it would have banned any insurance company participating in the exchange (a.k.a., all of them) from offering abortion coverage, period--even to people paying for their insurance with their own money, not federal subsidies. You seem to have the mistaken impression that only poor women were at risk, when the reality is that the Stupak Amendment would severely restrict access to middle-class women as well.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

12. why did Stupidk put the ammendment in?

why do they use abortion as a political wedge. Nuisance.

[napi21]

19. Catholic Bishops & Evangelicals have been pressuring for this

for years! Planned Parenthood gets quite a bit of funding from the Feds & they've been trying to remove that funding for years! This time they think they've won.

[MajorChode]

22. It was a poison pill attempt

It's a very common political move. It has as much chance of seeing the light of day as a fart in a hurricane, but it will serve as a roadblock either permanent or temporary. There's not much chance the Senate will reciprocate and it will be removed during the negotiations between the house and senate where the GOPhers and DINOs won't be invited. The only question is whether the final bill will pass and I think it will. The DINOs want this bill to die, they just don't want to be caught holding the knife. At the end of the day at least some of them are going to vote for it because they won't survive politically if they don't and they know it.

[populistdriven]

27. Let Bart Know what you Think of him

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6979368&mesg_id=6979368