Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Soul Crusher on November 16, 2009, 05:38:40 AM
-
Axelrod Signals Obama Will Try to Strip Abortion Language From Health Care Bill
by
FOXNews.com
________________________ ________________________ _________
The amendment, authored by Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., went beyond preventing the proposed government-run plan from covering abortion to restrict federal subsidies from going toward private plans that offer abortion coverage. David Axelrod says the amendment changes the 'status quo,' something the president cannot abide.
White House Senior Adviser David Axelrod suggested Sunday that President Obama will intervene to make sure a controversial amendment restricting federal funding for abortion coverage is stripped from final health care reform legislation.
In doing so, the president would be heeding the call of abortion rights supporters like Planned Parenthood that have called the White House their "strongest weapon" in keeping such restrictions out of the bill.
The abortion amendment was tacked on to the House health care bill and was a key factor in securing the votes of moderate Democrats before the bill was approved by a narrow margin last weekend. The amendment, authored by Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., went beyond preventing the proposed government-run plan from covering abortion to restrict federal subsidies from going toward private plans that offer abortion coverage.
Axelrod said in an interview Sunday that the amendment changes the "status quo," something the president cannot abide.
"The president has said repeatedly, and he said in his speech to Congress, that he doesn't believe that this bill should change the status quo as it relates to the issue of abortion," Axelrod said. "This shouldn't be a debate about abortion. And he's going to work with Senate and the House to try and ensure that at the end of the day, the status quo is not changed ... I believe that there are discussions ongoing to how to adjust it accordingly."
Axelrod said the president believes that issue, as well as the ongoing dispute over what kind of government-run insurance plan, if any, should be included in the overhaul, "can and will be worked through before it reaches his desk."
Axelrod spoke on CNN's "State of the Union."
The president already said last week that he did not support the amendment.
"I laid out a very simple principle, which is this is a health care bill, not an abortion bill. And we're not looking to change what is the principle that has been in place for a very long time, which is federal dollars are not used to subsidize abortions," Obama told ABC News on Monday. "And I want to make sure that the provision that emerges meets that test -- that we are not in some way sneaking in funding for abortions, but on the other hand that we're not restricting women's insurance choices."
Meanwhile, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell told "Fox News Sunday" that the American people do not want any taxpayer money going toward abortion, as he gloated over how long the Senate could potentially hold up the health care bill.
"I think it would be very difficult to pass a bill that, in effect, either directly or indirectly provided tax money to pay for abortions," McConnell said.
The timetable for Senate action on health care has been thrown into question, though Axelrod said the White House still wants to "get it done" this year. McConnell said "delay" will be a hallmark of the Senate process going forward. He complained that the current bill would raise taxes and cut Medicare, an allegation that was backed up by a Washington Post article Sunday that showed the agency administering Medicare and Medicaid found that a proposed $500 billion in Medicare cuts would in turn cut benefits for seniors.
"There will be a lot of amendments over a lot of weeks," McConnell said. "I mean, the Senate is not the House. You saw in the House three votes and it was over in one day. Look, we spent four weeks on a farm bill in the last Congress, eight weeks on an energy bill earlier this decade. This will be on the floor for quite a long time. I think it ought to be on the floor at least as long as it's been in Harry Reid's office."
________________________ ________________________ ______________
If Zero does this, Stupak already said he is going to lead a Dem revolt in the house to kill this thing.
-
If Zero does this, Stupak already said he is going to lead a Dem revolt in the house to kill this thing.
You think Obama should keep the abortion part in the bill or not?
-
You think Obama should keep the abortion part in the bill or not?
No tax dollars should go to elective abortions.
-
Not surprising, for as polished as he is and as much as he wants to appear like a uniter, this president is a hard leftist people.
This was said during the campaign, but people chose to ignore the warnings.
-
Not surprising, for as polished as he is and as much as he wants to appear like a uniter, this president is a hard leftist people.
This was said during the campaign, but people chose to ignore the warnings.
Shoot - check out the videos I just posted on health care.
The GOP needs to be running these 24/7.
-
I read an article in my American Academy of Family Practice newsletter about universal healthcare and now it may come in stages.Some factions of the AAFP leadership are in favor of universal healthcare (they feel everyone should have coverage and would make sacrifices on other aspects of the bill to get it).
This is a large journal that goes out to the vast majority of family docs. They probably don't screen what they write like this administration does. To me, it's clear that factions in the democratic party absolutely want universal healthcare and are taking a step-wise approach to that end.
THE GOVERNMENT RUN OPTION IS A STEPPING STONE TO THEIR ULTIMATE GOAL, UNIVERSAL GOVERNMENT CONTROLLED HEALTHCARE.
-
Yeah, they plan on bankrupting and collapsing the current system and then have people begging in the streets for the govt "to do something".
-
No tax dollars should go to elective abortions.
but you're ok with non-elective abortions?
-
but you're ok with non-elective abortions?
If its rape or something where the persons life is truly in danger thats sometghing else, but not as a form of birth control with tax dollars.
-
If its rape or something where the persons life is truly in danger thats sometghing else, but not as a form of birth control with tax dollars.
good to hear
how about it there are no federal tax dollars used but it's just coming from collected premiums (not specifically from the person getting the medical procedure but just in the normal way that "insurance" collect premiums and pays for coverage)
-
good to hear
how about it there are no federal tax dollars used but it's just coming from collected premiums (not specifically from the person getting the medical procedure but just in the normal way that "insurance" collect premiums and pays for coverage)
I dont have a problem with that, but my problem is the the fed gov is going to be giving subsidies for people to buy private insurance, which in essence is the same thing.
What i would like to see is/are many options across all types of costs, allowances, coverages, etc, almost like a menu, where people can pick and choose what they want to pay for and not pay for. As a 34 y/o man, i dont feel I should be paying insurance preimums based on "events" that I can not possibly ever have.
-
Is removing the "abortion Clause" is going to make this bill any better? I think not.
-
I dont have a problem with that, but my problem is the the fed gov is going to be giving subsidies for people to buy private insurance, which in essence is the same thing.
What i would like to see is/are many options across all types of costs, allowances, coverages, etc, almost like a menu, where people can pick and choose what they want to pay for and not pay for. As a 34 y/o man, i dont feel I should be paying insurance preimums based on "events" that I can not possibly ever have.
you're aware of course that right now your insurance company collects your premiums and then pays for coverage to other people for "events" that you will never have. That's how insurance works. More importantly that's WHY insurance works.
-
you're aware of course that right now your insurance company collects your premiums and then pays for coverage to other people for "events" that you will never have. That's how insurance works. More importantly that's WHY insurance works.
I know that Straw. However, when the govt mandates that my carrier cover more events, etc my premiums are going to go up even higher. There is absolutely nothing in this bill other than things that will cause my costs to go up.
This is why i have always been in favor of a catastrophic plan with a very high deductible.
-
Is removing the "abortion Clause" is going to make this bill any better? I think not.
I agree
-
I oppose coverage for elective abortions in any plan. Abortions to protect the health of the mother, absolutely.