![[SeMissourian.com]](http://gcdailyworld.com/images/nameplate.png)
RSS
Print
Email link
Respond to editor
Read comments (35)
Share link
del.icio.us
Digg
StumbleUpon
Technorati
Newsvine
Facebook
Furl
Reddit
Google
 Eighth District U.S. Rep. Brad Ellsworth (D-IN) [Click to enlarge] |
WASHINGTON -- A group of pro-life Democrats have reached an agreement that will allow the House to consider an amendment authored by Reps. Bart Stupak (D-MI), Brad Ellsworth (D-IN) and other pro-life members that will strictly prohibiT funding of abortion services in insurance plans on the National Health Exchange.
Ellsworth, a member of the House Pro-Life Caucus, issued the following statement:
"This has truly been a group effort among pro-life Democrats and organizations, and I am proud of what we've been able to accomplish over the last few days. From day one, my goal has been to ensure federal tax dollars are not used to pay for abortions and to provide Americans with pro-life options on the exchange. And I am proud to be part of an effort to make this goal a reality."
The bill, HR 3962, currently funds abortions in two ways -- by allowing the public option (or government-run health care program) to pay for abortions and by allowing the affordability credits the government would give to consumers to be used to pay for health care plans that fund abortions.
The Stupak amendment would apply the fundamental principles of the Hyde amendment, which has long prohibited abortion funding under the Medicaid and HHS programs, to the health care reform bill and essentially prohibit all government funding of abortion under it.
The Hill, a Washington-based publication reports that House Democratic leaders will allow an up-or-down vote on an amendment blocking any money in its healthcare overhaul from funding abortions, risking the votes of members who support abortion rights.
Anti-abortion Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) had told a bleary-eyed Rules committee panel that a deal struck earlier in the day to move forward on the issue was off.
"There was some compromise language from different proposals that we thought would be satisfactory, our understanding was that we had an agreement. Two hours later it was not an agreement," Stupak said as the clock neared 1 a.m. Saturday.
Stupak, flanked by a bipartisan coterie of abortion opponents, argued for consideration of their amendment that explicitiy prohibits federal funding of abortions under the Democrats' healthcare bill before the Speaker's select committee.
"I used to think that life was black or white, but the older I get the most gray it becomes," liberal Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) told the panelists.
"I find this amendment very, very uncomfortable."
Freshman Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper (D-Pa.) responded that their amendment would not change the law on abortion.
"This doesn't change the law at all, it's not outlawing abortion today; a majority of abortions are paid for with cash," she said.
But abortion-rights advocates, including the Speaker and a majority of the Democratic caucus, support a provision in the healthcare bill that would subsidize abortions for poor women who can't afford them.
The agreement was quickly condemned by Planned Parenthood Federation of America, which called the amendment by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) a "de facto abortion ban."
"A vote for Rep. Stupak's amendment is a vote to weaken women's access to comprehensive reproductive care and to take away private benefits that women currently have," said Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards.
On Friday, House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) said passing Stupak's legislation could jeopardize passage of the bill, because abortion-rights supporters were likely to vote against a bill that includes it.
###
ORIGINAL STORY FILED ON THURSDAY:
Eighth District U.S. Rep. Brad Ellsworth (D-IN), who owns a 100 percent Pro-Life voting record, has pledged to withhold his support for the pending healthcare legislation now being considered by Congress unless his concerns about taxpayer funding for abortions are addressed.
Ellsworth has drafted a floor amendment that he contends will prevent federal tax dollars from being used to fund abortions.
However, members of National and State Right to Life organizations have taken exception to the Ellsworth amendment calling it "phony."
National Right to Life Committee Legislative Director Douglas Johnson sent out a news release Tuesday that states, "The language being circulated, and loosely associated with Rep. Brad Ellsworth (D-IN), does not mitigate either of the abortion-subsidy provisions contained in H.R. 3962. This language is intended only to wrap the pro-abortion provisions in additional layers of concealment. The latest version being circulated contains a money-laundering scheme that is truly laughable. The amendment authorizes the federal insurance plan, the public option, to pay for all elective abortions."
Right to Life backers appear to support a more strongly worded amendment being offered by Rep. Bart Stupak, a pro-life Democrat from Michigan, that would curb all abortion funding in the healthcare bill.
A spokesperson for Ellsworth's office in Washington, DC says the criticism to the amendment is pre-mature and came after a draft of an amendment was made public.
"We have been telling them (Pro-Life supporters) that this (amendment) is a work in progress. We just hope they will wait and see what the final product is before they pass judgment on it," Elizabeth Farrar, a press secretary for Ellsworth told the Greene County Daily World in a telephone interview Thursday.
She pointed out that Rep. Ellsworth and Rep. Stupak talk on a regular basis and said, "They are both on the same page in terms of working toward the same goals that is to make sure federal funds are not provided for abortions."
She said that Ellsworth's amendment is an alternative to Stupak's amendment, which Farrar said may not have enough support on the House floor.
"If they could get the (Stupak) amendment to the floor, the Congressman (Ellsworth) would support it. But what we are starting to see is there may not be enough support to actually get it to a vote. What we are trying to do is find another way to get to that goal," Fararr said. "It's kind of dual track, if Congressman Stupak can't get any traction on his end then we have a Plan B to go to with the Ellsworth language which we are still drafting."
Indiana Right to Life President and CEO Mark Fitcher disagrees and sent a letter Tuesday to Ellsworth urging him to withdraw his amendment and support an already presented amendment.
"The Stupak amendment is on the table. There is no reason to offer alternatives to the Stupak amendment when it already addresses our concerns," he wrote.
In a statement to the Greene County Daily World on Thursday morning, Ellsworth noted, "I'm glad to see pro-life Hoosiers standing up and making their voices heard in this debate, and I join them in demanding action to address pro-life concerns in healthcare reform legislation. As I have said repeatedly, I will not support a bill that I believe would result in federal tax dollars being used to pay for abortions, and, with the help of pro-life constituents, I am leading the effort to protect federal tax dollars and provide pro-life insurance options to Americans."
He added, "As healthcare reform makes its way to the floor, I have been working round-the-clock with like-minded members to draft legislation that will remedy these concerns. The Congressional Research Service -- the nonpartisan research arm of Congress -- has analyzed my initial drafts and concluded that my amendment will ensure no federal funds will be used to provide elective abortions. While my efforts are far from a done deal, we have been making steady progress in gathering the support from pro-life members that will be necessary to ensure these concerns are taken seriously and addressed."
According to a news release from Ellsworth's office, his amendment proposal would make five key pro-life changes to the bill; effectively preventing federal tax dollars from being used to fund abortions and ensuring Americans have access to pro-life insurance options in the proposed Health Insurance Exchange:
* Explicitly prevents all federal tax dollars from being used to provide abortions in the public option.
* Prohibits any funds from the U.S. Treasury from paying for abortion services in any of the plans purchased through the proposed Health Insurance Exchange -- private or public.
* Establishes clear, strict rules for separating public funds from the premiums of private individuals (ensuring that no public funds are ever used to pay for an abortion in any health plan offered on the Health Insurance Exchange).
* Guarantees participants in the Health Insurance Exchange will always have access to a pro-life insurance option.
* Expands protections to prevent the government from discriminating against pro-life health insurance plans.
The House vote on the healthcare proposal is expected on Saturday.
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. If you feel that a comment is offensive, please
I am for real Health Care reform however this bill comming to a vote in the House has nothing to do with reform. Please call Mr. Ellsworth and encourage him to do the right thing and help kill this bill for good. Perhaps then Congress can work on real reform.
Any kind of reform is better than none at all.I for one am sick and tired of the insurance co.s owning us. Its time to get something in the form of competition against them. The last chance we had was with the dems. in the white house and it was blown apart by the big money of the gop., and pro lifers. We put Brad Ellsworth in office and he is working hard to make a change for the better for all of us.. Let him do his job.It s true, what if 1 plan fails?, then his sounds like a good back up..if it dosnt toss the baby out with the water.then we will wait anothe 8 yrs. to try to get it right..
This has nothing to do with health care. It has to do with the Constitutional protection of Life given to the unborn.
The Constitution protects our innate rights Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.
(and if anyone doubts whether or not the unborn should be considered human, smash the egg of a federally protected bird species and argue to the judge that it was not ACTUALLY a bird yet.)
Let your voice be heard.
http://www.ellsworth.house.gov/index.php...
For Liberty those rights you listed are called Birth Rights. They are rights you possess from birth. This is about healthcare reform and the fact that any type of conservative base doesn't want reform because it might affect the upper class.
I'm SO disappointed with Congressman Ellsworth. I sat at the Greene County Right to Life Banquet and listened to him promise not to vote for this version of health care reform if it had taxpayer funded abortion in it. Now he's playing a Washington D.C. game and insulting those of us who took him at his word that night. His proposed amendment only shifts the check-writing for abortions to a private company. The money would still come from the taxpayers. Most Americans agree that we have the right to choose to pay for your own or anyone's abortion.
It's too bad only NO! about half of Congress is NO! involved in the process NO! while the other half is sitting NO! back without actually contributing NO! anything to the debate.
"NO, no, no!" is pretty distracting isn't it?
The Republicans probably have some useful suggestions that would help the process. If only they would offer them *within* the process instead of with sound bites to the media and taking every possible opportunity to scuttle the whole thing.
When only one team shows up for a debate, there will be a "winner," but there won't be any resolution to the question.
One way to get the attention of ANY CONGRESSMAN OR SENATOR is to e mail them with your views.
Then tell them, I did or did not, vote for you in the last election.
I am against this Health Care Bill.
If you vote for it I will not only vote against you come the next election but I will support your opponent financially and will work for him/her very spiritedly for free.
Please if you agree with this idea send these suggestions to all on your e mail list. Then ask them to do the same. Maybe we can get the suggestion to our elected officials that if this is so good have it for yourselves and your families.
toothie,
Given the subject matter at hand, could you have chosen a worse cliche to embellish your comment?
"if it dosnt toss the baby out with the water."
Not even sure what else to say.
I am surprised (sort of) that any conservative would bash a Democrat that is pro-life....I think that considering the fact that he is a Democrat, voters who are pro-life advocates should be pleased the Mr. Ellsworth is holding to his convictions to aid their cause. Should the House member propose an amendment that has NO chance of passing?
That being said, those who are proposing that we need reform....you are right. But, you are not going to get everything that you want in a country that does not share all of your views.
I am not saying don't fighting for your views but realize that this country cannot continue to pay insurance companies 20%+ annual increases for insurance premiums.
By the way, if you aren't happy with abortion rights, send you complaints to the Supreme Court. If they would outlaw abortion (make it unconstitutional), they would actually be doing the Democrats a favor. Democrats who are pro-choice would still vote with the left...and many pro-life citizens would vote "D" too.
I also have an idea for those complaining about government spending...let's just cut other social programs like farm subsidies, Medicare, Social Security, etc....Oh, that dips into your pocket...so you don't want that....
Where were you "deficit fighters" when Bush was blowing all of the surplus created by Clinton?
This country has spent over 900 billion dollars plus on the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.....and continues to spend $10,000 every six seconds...Nope, not kidding, every six seconds.
Shame on all of us for letting this happen....In other words, health care is basically free (or would have been in a few seconds)if we had just stuck to the war in Afghanistan.
People who are criticizing this reform without criticizing the war in Iraq are being pretty hypocritical.....And, don't try to say that this post is un-American - I support the troops as much or more than anyone...just not the ridiculous mission and the financial, emotional, and personal toll that it took on this country's economy and its people, especially the soldiers and their families.
The current house bill on health care requires all "enrollees" to pay into an abortion fund. That fund would be used to pay for elective abortions. That is their loophole around using "federal funds".
Line 16, page 96, section 213, under "Insurance Rating Rules." The premium will be paid into a U.S. Treasury account.
Section 213 describes the process in which the Health Benefits Commissioner is to assess the monthly premiums that will be used to pay for elective abortions under the government-run plan. The Commissioner must charge at a minimum $1 per enrollee per month.
This is only one item of the 2000 plus page monstrosity of government takeover of yet another private USA industry.
All Americans should be appalled by the total disregard this Congress has for its constituents, for the people who elected them to office.
This is only one item of the 2000 plus page monstrosity of government takeover of yet another private USA industry.
To be fair, I'm against the Iraq war and look at how many of my taxdollars have been spent on it. My kids aren't in school, yet a portion of my property taxes go to support the local school system.
At any given time our collective tax dollars are going to be going to something that someone disagrees with or doesn't utilize.
Whether Mr Ellsworth feels comfortable or not with abortion language in this health care bill, the majority of Americans do not want government run health care. Voting yes to this bill will guarantee those Representatives replacement in Congress.
Congress? Wake up. Your constituents, the American people are angry you ignore their wishes. You will finally hear our voices at the ballot box.
Well over 55% of American voters voted for President Obama last November. One of his key platforms was healthcare reform. All of the recent polls taken by independent organizations continue to show that the majority of Americans want healthcare reform now. The insurance companies have been dictating who gets covered, which doctor or hospital you can go to,and if you happen to become ill, they will refuse to pay because it could have been "pre-existing". The insurance companies are nothing more than legal loan sharks...you must keep paying them until you need their help then they are outta here.
Rep Ellsworth and the others who are "pro-life" need to realize and understand that abortion is a legal medical procedure and whether you like it or not, it is no one else's business if a woman and her doctor decide on that procedure. All of the anti-abortion fanatics that are so "pro-life" do not hesitate to kill people who work in Planned Parenthood offices or the doctors that give services to the women who come to them for a LEGAL procedure. I do not know how that can be in any way interpreted as "pro-life". And, the government has kowtowed to that group because the government has NEVER funded abortion, not even for the poorest of women. I find it funny, though, that while all of you "pro-lifers" moan and cry about keeping these babies alive, when they are here and need help, if the mother cannot afford another child, where are all the "pro-lifers?? Are they going to buy groceries and clothes for the child?? Are they going to keep the child from being abused??? Just wondering.
Health insurance is an option, not required by any entity for anyone. If the government has its way, health insurance will be required with fines levied against those who don't 'participate'. Escalating taxes, "fines" and decreased overall care of the American citizen's (and illegal immigrant) is not my idea of an improvement to society.
To those who keep justifying your views of abortion through this bill need to also see your hypocrisy.
Don't keep spewing verbage that Americans shouldn't oppose abortion and support Iraq, or support abortion bombers are delusional. No one wants to support abortion bombers, we just want people to make a better choice and put their "unintentional and inconvenient" babies up for adoption. Iraq is unrelated but at least 25 million people are free now instead of facing mass killings by Saddam with poison gas and beheadings.
You want choice to have and promote abortions but no choice on the healthcare plan.
This healthcare plan gives Americans no choice on if they have coverage or not, no choice on doctors covered by the government, no choice serving jail time or not, no choice on paying for abortions, no choice on protecting their medicare coverage, etc...
Ellsworth needs voted out for his manipulation this voting population. He can't be a democrat and be against abortion. By being a democrat , he agrees with their platform which specifically states that democrats support abortion at all stages. If you don't know what abortion is, then check out this web site:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBOAPleF1...
You can't have it both ways.
Freedom is freedom. Socialism is socialism.
Call your representatives and tell them to pack their bags. They can now enjoy the healthcare that we experience (as an unemployed congressman) and not the sweet benefits that congress receives.
cow rancher? If you serve even one term in Congress, you receive the elite Congressional health care for life.. FREE
You are correct. Thank you for correcting me.
I understand now why congressmen run for office, especially if it will cost the average American family $15,000 per year in 2016. They pay zero forever. How nice for them.
What a nice perk for the elite in Washington!
The 215 congressmen-women who voted for this bill last night are going to lose their seats next year, staring with Ellsworth.
Vote for the Doctor who is running against him!
Your "we did it to free Iraqis" rhetoric doesn't fly here....So, you are a big proponent of the war in Iraq?
Explain that to the thousands of casualties and family members that not have to deal with the fact that their son, daughter, mom, or dad is not coming home.
Despite your objections, it DOES fit here because it IS about the money....Almost all of your comments on this web site are about money...So you think that we should go to foreign countries, overthrow their governments, spend billions of dollars, and sacrifice thousands of Americans?
As far as spewing verbage, I believe that you are the king. It isn't your views - It is just the fact that if you don't have a solid rebuttal, you try to trash the other person's comments.....You are losing credibility with many of this web site.
What kind of democracy are you referring to when you make comments like a Democrat has to vote like a Democrat? Or a Republican should vote like a Republican? If that were the case, the health care bill that you are attacking so strongly would already be law.....There are Democrats in the House and Senate than Republicans, right?
Sorry...Forgot the word "more" in last sentence.
Sorry I've lost credibility with you, or the other far left liberals, THE END...it means so much to me.
I bet it was the abortion video and the other truths that bug you. I am just a simple farmer and call things as I see them.
I do believe you are right, this whole Congress and President are about money. That would explain your concern about comments as well. I state the facts about the contents of this healthcare bill and the repercussions herein. My rebuttals are solid, fact based and not based on polls and side agendas that veer away from the Constitution. If they do, then I expect you to rebut the facts with other facts, not left wing talking points and emotional attachments to marxism, socialism, or other ideals that directly assault hard working, patriotic Americans. I am not a king, but a downtrodden taxpayer that is repressed by the current government. You are, too, but don't realize it yet.
Folks, here's a Facebook page for the next congressman of the 8th district Dr. Larry Bucshon.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Larry-Bucs...
He is a heart surgeon from Newburg Indiana and his views can be viewed by clicking on this link. Also, to show your support for his Constitutionally sound position click on the "become a friend" button.
I don't think that the United States of America can stand more of the same of the last 8 years.President Obama is trying to bring this country back from the abyss that "good ole boy GW put it in. He has not even been on the job for a year and the "conservatives" or "Republicans" or the "TeaBaggers" are calling him a failure. Bush is far more a failure for starting a war in Afghanistan then letting Cheney and Rumsfeld bamboozle him into going to war in Iraq. He left both for President Obama to complete, in addition to the financial meltdown and the foreclosure crisis and out of control unemployment...the list goes on. At least President Obama can handle more than one thing at a time and hasn't spent most of his time on vacation.
As for Representative Ellsworth, it is his choice to vote however he feels he must, but he also must realize that he represents all of the 8th district, not just men who feel they have the right to tell a woman what she can and cannot do with her own body. I personally do not believe in abortion, but I don't have the right to take that choice away from someone else. It is a LEGAL procedure...how about if we stop paying for vasectomies for males...I can hear the uproar already. Freedom is choice for everyone. Taking that choice away from women is not acceptable.
I agree completely with virginiagrace. The majority of people on the right who are angry with Rep. Ellsworth probably didn't vote for him in the first place. He was voting the way he thought the majority of the people who elected him into office would want him to. He attempted to do something for the pro-life people (a community he is a part of but that is not in line with the majority of his party), but they got mad that he didn't do it the way they would have done it. By the way, Dick Cheney (one of the most Republican Republicans) is for same-sex marriage, but that goes against the platform of his party. Therefore, Dick Cheney is no longer a Republican.
As a life long Republican I did vote for Rep. Ellsworth but it won't happen again. I urge everyone who disagrees with how this man voted on the Health Care Bill to call his office and let him know he will not get your vote in the upcoming election.
Jimmy42 - "those rights you listed are called Birth Rights."
They are not 'birth rights' they are the right of every citizen of the United States, including the unborn. If they were 'birth rights', legal immigrants would never be able to acquire true citizenship.
The Constitution states, of itself, that it is meant to, "secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and OUR POSTERITY, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
They are speaking there of people who hadn't even been born yet.
I believe that the thing we need to remember when discussing nationalized healthcare in this country is that it is not an inherent right. Nothing can be a right that you have to take by coersion from someone else.
Nobody can really argue that healthcare is a right or isn't a right. It's just what you believe, and I believe everybody has the right to be healthy and be taken care of when they are very sick. People shouldn't sit at home dying because they can't afford treatment.
Jimmy42 - 'Nobody can really argue that healthcare is a right or isn't a right.'
If I believed that everyone had a 'right' to affordable personal transit, would you agree to a government program to provide cars to all of those who could not currently afford one? This would allow millions of low income individuals to be able to get out of the ghetto, find work, and shuttle their kids to decent schools, parks, doctors, hospitals, etc.
One could argue that this would help low income families as much, if not more, than nationalized healthcare. However, I doubt that many people would see this as a 'right'.
It is a rare occurrence in this country where an individual is actually DENIED healthcare due to lack of insurance, and it is certainly not a big enough problem for the federal government to get involved. Let the states take care of their own.
For Liberty you bring up make a decent argument, but having a car cannot affect wether you live or die, and many people don't seek treatment for illnesses, because they can't handle the financial burden.
Jimmy42 -
I would argue that in a substantial minority of cases, lack of adequate transportation plays a part in low-income mortality. The government study, cited below, lists 'lack of transportation to and from doctors' as a factor in the higher AIDS death rates amongst African-Americans.
My insistence is that, aside from being unconstitutional, nationalized healthcare does not make sense. Lack of appropriate medical care is a problem that is better handled at the state or local level, where people actually live amongst those whom they would seek to protect.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14674...
Would you like to explain to me how nationalized healthcare is unconstitutional?
cow rancher,
It should...I vote....Again, my point is made. I am not a far left political observer....but people like you put us there because of your "Republicans are always right...Democrats always wrong" attitude....
Try convincing me without scaring me...
Jimmy42 - The 10th Amendment limits the federal government in its powers.
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Justed released.....
Republican National Committee insurance covers elective abortion.....Interesting.....Find it on Yahoo!!!!
Very interesting I guess, according to Cow Rancher, the RNC is not Republican.
I don't understand all of this hoop la about abortion. I have never had an abortion. I will never have an abortion. My wife, mother, sister, daughter, grand daughters, or great grand daughters have never had an abortion.
If you do not want an abortion, don't have one. To my knowledge, no one has ever been forced to have an abortion. Not anyone I know anyway. I guess if someone out there has been forced to have an abortion then it would be an issue. If that is the case please inform us and tell us who forced you to have an abortion. Otherwise, I'm back to square one. Just what is the problem?