Democrats Fail to Reach Deal on Abortion for Health Care Reform
Patricia Murphy
Capitol Hill Bureau Chief
Posted:
03/13/10
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said Friday that Democrats have not been able to broker a deal between pro-life and pro-choice Democrats on the abortion language in health care reform, and will move toward a final vote without resolving the issue.
Speaking to reporters in the Capitol, Hoyer said, "We don't want to go without (the pro-life members') votes, but we do want to forge ahead, and as you know Mr. Stupak has made it very very clear that he's very strongly in favor of achieving health care in this Congress. And I think that a lot of his colleagues feel the same way."
At issue is the difference between the abortion language in the House and Senate health care bills. Neither bill allows direct federal funding of the procedure. But the House bill, authored by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), prohibits a woman who gets federal subsidies for health insurance from receiving coverage for elective abortions and from purchasing such coverage with her own money. The Senate bill would allow women who receive subsidies to purchase additional coverage for elective abortions with private funds.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, a powerful voice in the abortion debate, said that no member of Congress could consider themselves pro-life if they vote for the Senate's version. Stupak has warned that he and at least 11 other Democrats will vote no on a final health care bill if it leaves the Senate abortion language intact. Without the votes of Stupak and his like-minded colleagues, passing health care reform would be much more difficult.
(PD's David Gibson gives his take on why the Senate bill is more pro-life than the House bill HERE.)
Some House members had hoped to craft an abortion compromise that would be included in the package of "fixers" to the Senate bill. The fixers would be adopted by the Senate through reconciliation, a process that would require 51 votes rather than 60. But it became clear that abortion language could not be included in the reconciliation process because it does not relate to the federal budget. Another proposal to have a stand-alone vote on the abortion language was rejected by pro-life Democrats.
"We'll have to deal with that pretty much as it is at this point in time," Hoyer said. "We are hopeful that we will get a majority and we believe we will get a majority."
Following Hoyer's comments, Stupak told The Wall Street Journal he will not vote for the bill as it's planned, but said he had several objections to it. "It'd be very hard to vote for this bill even if they fixed the abortion language," he said. As to whether he plans to vote for it: "Nope."
Speaking to reporters in the Capitol, Hoyer said, "We don't want to go without (the pro-life members') votes, but we do want to forge ahead, and as you know Mr. Stupak has made it very very clear that he's very strongly in favor of achieving health care in this Congress. And I think that a lot of his colleagues feel the same way."
At issue is the difference between the abortion language in the House and Senate health care bills. Neither bill allows direct federal funding of the procedure. But the House bill, authored by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), prohibits a woman who gets federal subsidies for health insurance from receiving coverage for elective abortions and from purchasing such coverage with her own money. The Senate bill would allow women who receive subsidies to purchase additional coverage for elective abortions with private funds.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, a powerful voice in the abortion debate, said that no member of Congress could consider themselves pro-life if they vote for the Senate's version. Stupak has warned that he and at least 11 other Democrats will vote no on a final health care bill if it leaves the Senate abortion language intact. Without the votes of Stupak and his like-minded colleagues, passing health care reform would be much more difficult.
(PD's David Gibson gives his take on why the Senate bill is more pro-life than the House bill HERE.)
Some House members had hoped to craft an abortion compromise that would be included in the package of "fixers" to the Senate bill. The fixers would be adopted by the Senate through reconciliation, a process that would require 51 votes rather than 60. But it became clear that abortion language could not be included in the reconciliation process because it does not relate to the federal budget. Another proposal to have a stand-alone vote on the abortion language was rejected by pro-life Democrats.
"We'll have to deal with that pretty much as it is at this point in time," Hoyer said. "We are hopeful that we will get a majority and we believe we will get a majority."
Following Hoyer's comments, Stupak told The Wall Street Journal he will not vote for the bill as it's planned, but said he had several objections to it. "It'd be very hard to vote for this bill even if they fixed the abortion language," he said. As to whether he plans to vote for it: "Nope."