Pro-Life Democrats threaten to block healthcare reform bill

  Despite President Obama’s statement that the time for “bickering” is over, the healthcare reform bill still faces some serious roadblocks on its way to passage. What the president calls “bickering” is what most people consider debate and negotiation. “Bickering” was a term that the president used to describe partisan debate but the latest “bickering” is coming from the pro-life Democrats.

  The pro-life caucus will move to block the healthcare reform bill unless an amendment is added to the legislation that will specifically prohibit the federal funding of abortion.

  It seems as if the abortion language in the bill is a bit murky, the Hyde amendment prohibits federal funding of abortions but because it is attached to Health and Human Services Appropriations there is speculation that money can still be used to fund abortions by any new programs that are started up and funded under the healthcare bill itself.

  Rep. Bart Stupak has a simple solution to what quite possibly could be a loophole that would allow federal funding of some abortions; he wants to attach the Hyde amendment directly to the healthcare reform bill. This would close up any loophole that may exist in the bill as it is currently written.

  He is threatening to stop the bill from making it to the floor for a vote if his proposal is not met.

If our amendment is not made in order we will try to shut down the rule, preventing the health care bill from coming to the floor for a vote,” Stupack stated. “If the Speaker believes that abortion funding is not in the bill then she should let me have my amendment, because if anything it would just be redundant.”

  He hits the nail on the head about Speaker Pelosi. If she truly believes that the current language already stops all federal funding of abortion than she should have no problem moving this language to the main portion of the healthcare reform bill, this would guarantee that outcome. As he said, it will just be redundant.

  But if she refuses to move the language to the main portion of the bill than she is admitting that it is possible that this loophole does exist and she is unwilling to close it. There would be no other reason for her to be unwilling to move the language to guarantee an outcome that she already claims exists in the legislation.

  Her actions on this issue will tell us all that we need to know about Nancy Pelosi’s position; if she moves the language she will satisfy the needs of the pro-life Democrats and guarantee that federal money will not be used for any abortions, but if she refuses to move the language than a possible loophole may remain open that will allow the federal funding of some abortions and she will lose the pro-life Democrats. 

  It seems like it should be an easy decision for her to make if the language already exists that bans all federal funding of abortions. If she risks losing pro-life Democrats over her unwillingness to move this language than there is definitely and ulterior motive at play here. Why else would she face the embarrassment of having the healthcare reform bill stopped by her own party over where language is located in the bill?

I guess it comes down to one question, which lobby is greater? The pro-life Democrats or the pro-choice lobby.