If you have "no place to go," come here!

What could possibly go wrong?

vastleft's picture

NYT headline:

Dems woo abortion foes in push for health bill
No votes yet


mass's picture
Submitted by mass on

Who wants to bet the pro-choicers will fold like a cheap suit? Thanks Nance.

madamab's picture
Submitted by madamab on

Credible rumors have it that the Democratic leadership in the House and Senate are cutting a deal with Rep. Bart Stupak to insert the Stupak-Pitts Amendment into the health care bill at the last minute.


These are the numbers to call Hoyer, Pelosi and the White House:

Pelosi: 202-225-4965
Hoyer: 202-225-3130
White House: 202-456-1111

Here is Pelosi's email address:

Here is my letter:

Dear Speaker Pelosi,

I respectfully demand that you stand firm against Congressman Stupak and his ilk. There is no legislative "victory" that can be won when women's lives and reproductive health are the sacrifice.

I cannot imagine why a pro-choice woman would vote for any Democrat after misogynist Neanderthals like Stupak were even given any oxygen at all, but certainly, should you allow to Stupak to prevail, I hope you don't expect us to volunteer, vote or donate to you or the Democratic Party ever again.

If you really want the support of the liberal base and women back, kill the bill and start over with HR 676, Expanded and Improved Medicare for All. You won't have another chance to do this. Why not do it right the first time?

Sincerely, MadamaB

vastleft's picture
Submitted by vastleft on

to feed the anti-abortion beast without too much flak.

Do you think women will be directly forced to "grin and bear" anti-abortion language in the bill, or will some side deal git 'er done for reproduction-rights foes, in order to get their votes for this historically historic HCR bill?

madamab's picture
Submitted by madamab on

So that deal appears to be done already.

In a super-cynical way, I wonder if this furor over Stupak is just to get us to accept Nelson, which I don't. But in reality, I think Pelosi thinks she needs his vote and will do anything to get what she perceives as a legislative "victory." So yes, whatever Stupak wants, he will get. Once again, she who compromises is thrown under the bus.

The subject of my email was "Save the Women: Kill the Bill!"

I'm going to call my rep in DC later on.

madamab's picture
Submitted by madamab on

Nelson is basically the same as Stupak IIRC: both Amendments extend the Hyde restrictions on abortion funding from federal sources, and strip abortion coverage from women who already have it.

For details, NOW or Reproductive Health Reality Check have it covered.

Nelson has completely fallen down the memory hole because Stupak has been so out in front about his radical woman-hatred. But if the current bill passes with Nelson intact, women will still suffer. The ovarian penalty will be severe.

Save the Women: Kill the Bill!

vastleft's picture
Submitted by vastleft on

Perhaps a subject-matter specialist can take up the charge of clarifying -- and crystallizing -- the similarities between the two, and calling out the bad-cop / other-bad-cop villain-rotation trick that's greasing the skids for this.

Look! Over there! Bart Stupak! (And meanwhile....)

three wickets's picture
Submitted by three wickets on

..but thought Nelson allowed women to buy insurance covering abortion on the exchange but it had to be separate from their general health insurance policy. The Stupak mission creep is that it not only gets rid of that, it wears away at current employer plans that cover abortions if those plans get any tax breaks or other fed subsidies, and even targets individuals' ability to pay for abortions with their own money if they receive any federal aid, based on the argument that money is fungible.

Submitted by Anne on

so it doesn't have to go in the legislation is the latest rumor.

Also this

True? Who knows.

I guess if you want/need an alibi for where you were when one more bullet was fired into women's rights, best to subcontract out that job, huh?