Tag Archives: Bart Stupak

Obamacare to fund congressional, staff abortions

obama_032410

Paging Bart Stupak.  On March 24, 2010, he and other congresspersons calling themselves pro-life Democrats smiled for the camera as they watched President Obama sign an executive order no one but them believed would keep abortion out of Obamacare. (Stupak is in the photo above off of Obama’s right shoulder, wearing a grey suit. Click to enlarge.)

Besides the inobvious expansion of abortion in Obamcare – a mandate that forces insurance companies and employers to cover contraceptives and morning-to-days-after contraceptives, both of which can cause early abortions – there is the obvious, as explained in National Review Online, September 25:

An analysis by the Charlotte Lozier Institute published this week suggests that the number of abortions that will be heavily subsidized via federal premium tax credits and Medicaid expansion is likely to be between 71,000 and 111,500 per year. This approaches one in ten abortions performed in the United States.

The number is split roughly 50-50 between abortions subsidized by the ASPs [abortion-covering state plans] in states that have not barred them from their exchanges and abortions newly reimbursable under Medicaid expansion in states that use their own taxpayer funds to underwrite them.

2543433_4138416_lzThe obvious was followed by an in-your-face this past Monday, when the Office of Personnel Management ruled that “members of Congress and their staffs will be able to buy health care plans that pay for abortions, even though the premiums are funded largely by taxpayer money – a move that conservatives say breaks federal law on abortion funding,” according to the Washington Times.

A pro-life friend on the Hill explained in an email how this rule violates the law:

The final rule indicates that OPM does not intend to comply with the pro-life Smith amendment as it administers health insurance benefits for this group of federal employees.

As you may recall, 84 Members of Congress sent a letter to OPM Acting Director Elaine Kaplan earlier this month.  The letter pointed out that the Smith amendment (first offered in 1983 by Rep. Chris Smith, R-NJ) is annually attached to the Financial Services Appropriations bill and governs activities by OPM employees. Specifically the Smith amendment states that no funds may be used to “pay for an abortion, or the administrative expenses in connection with any health plan under the Federal employees health benefits program which provides any benefits or coverage for abortions.”

The Member letter specifies that collecting and disburses premiums for health plans that include elective abortion are administrative activities and would constitute a clear violation of the Smith amendment.  While all insurance plans for Federal employees under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program exclude elective abortion, the ACA deviated from this longstanding policy and explicitly allowed plans on the new health care exchanges to include coverage for all abortion.

In the final rule OPM specifies that despite the Smith amendment they will carry out administrative tasks in conjunction with health plans that include elective abortion.  They justify such action by saying that OPM does not “administer the terms of the health benefits plans offered on an Exchange.”  Even though the Smith amendment is in no way limited to administration of the “terms” of a plan, OPM appears to be arbitrarily narrowing the Smith amendment without Congressional approval.

Also paging former Congressman Steve Driehaus, who sued Susan B. Anthony List for defamation after his loss in 2010 to pro-life Republican Steve Chabot, claiming this sign was fraudulent. Click to enlarge…

driehaus-billboard22

Driehaus is in the top photo on the far right, smiling broadly. He lost his case in federal district court in January 2013, but the sore loser quickly filed an appeal, which has still not been decided. (Meanwhile SBA List has petitioned the US Supreme Court to review the constitutionality of the Ohio “false statement” law which provided the gateway for Driehaus’s lawsuit. SBA List expects SCOTUS to make its decision by early November.)

Stupak: Democrats will never regain majority without pro-lifers

“We will never get to be a majority again unless we have pro-life Democrats,” argued former Michigan Rep. Bart Stupak, who retired in 2010 and is on the board of Democrats for Life.

Thirty-five years ago when the Democrats enjoyed a 292-seat majority in the House, there were 125 anti-abortion Democrats – including a young Rep. Al Gore of Tennessee. Now there are only 17 anti-abortion Democrats and districts such as Gore’s are now represented by anti-abortion Republicans.

~ NBC News, “Anti-abortion Democrats struggle to be heard at Charlotte convention,” September 5

[Photo via NBC]

Politico: Democrats forced to switch strategies because abortion now a losing issue

If Democrats and liberal feminists lose the presidential election this fall despite their “war on women” pro-abortion strategy, they will have depleted their arsenal.

In their most candid interviews to date, various Democrats and abortion industry players freely admitted in a Politico article today what they have only heretofore hinted at (such as here and here): They know abortion has become a losing issue for them.

In order to get women to unwittingly support abortion, they are pulling out all stops, accusing Republicans of wanting to ban contraception,  encourage domestic violence, and deny women breast exams, maternity care, equal pay, and education access.  It’s all in a quite revealing article…

Democrats think they’ve figured out how to win the abortion debate: Don’t make it about abortion.

Starting Tuesday, the Democratic convention here will feature speeches from Planned Parenthood Action Fund President Cecile Richards, NARAL President Nancy Keenan and Georgetown Law student Sandra Fluke, who became a flashpoint in the debate over requiring Catholic institutions to pay for birth control.

But don’t expect them to focus on abortion – or even necessarily use the word. Instead, they’ll defend President Barack Obama’s record on reproductive health and reproductive rights. And, as they have before, they’ll accuse GOP nominee Mitt Romney and his party of waging a “war on women.”…

To keep and strengthen its standing, the party has recast its rhetoric on abortion rights. Polls consistently show that a majority of Americans favor at least some abortion restrictions. So Democrats have made the contentious issue part of a larger conversation about women’s health – and that, in turn, is part of a larger conversation that depicts Republicans as opposed to equal pay and access to education for women….

Democrats haven’t always been this cohesive on the abortion debate. In 1992, then-Pennsylvania Gov. Bob Casey was blocked from speaking to the Democratic convention as part of a fight over his anti-abortion views. For the next decade, Democrats lost House and Senate races in which abortion and measures to limit abortion became central, including fetal-pain legislation and late-term abortion bans.

In the years since, the number of anti-abortion Democrats in Washington has dwindled, and the party has coalesced in favor of abortion rights. Not until the past few months, though, did Democrats begin to put so much attention on issues related to contraception, women’s health care and abortion.

“I’ve never actually seen an election  and I’ve been through a few  where women’s basic access to health care has been so early and so often a topic of conversation,” Richards said.

(This is only because Richards and her tribe have made it so… because they can no longer scaremonger on “choice”… and also because they are greedy desperate for the windfall profits they would get from taxpayer funded contraception via Obamacare.)

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) described the issue in broad terms. “This is not just about the right to determine when or whether to have a family. It is about the ability to receive regular cancer screenings, maternity care and access to domestic violence counseling,” she said in a statement….

The shift in language helps her party: Asking people to support abortion is a lot harder than criticizing those who are against “rights” and “health.”

In the age of the ultrasound, the framing of ‘choice’ does continue to resonate with a segment of voters, but not everyone. There’s a lot of women for whom abortion is not a black-and-white issue, but quite gray,” said Matt Bennett, co-founder of Third Way, the moderate Democratic think tank. “Reproductive health is pretty straightforward.”…

Former Democratic Rep. Bart Stupak’s amendment to restrict funding for abortion in Obama’s health care bill nearly tore the party apart and scuttled the law. In the 2010 midterms, the anti-abortion movement almost exclusively backed Republicans, further thinning anti-abortion rights Democrats in Congress. Staunch anti-abortion rights Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper (D-PA), for example, was among lawmakers targeted in a multimillion dollar 2010 midterm ad campaign from the Susan B. Anthony List that charged she’d “betrayed” her district and “voted for the biggest expansion of abortion in decades.” She lost….

To boil down the pro-abortion dynamics: At some point the Democrat Party started losing politically due to the abortion issue. Rahm Emmanuel recognized this and won Dems back the House majority in 2006 by recruiting pro-lifers. Obama and Nancy Pelosi went on to sacrifice those pro-lifers to pass Obamacare, which has left the Party with no pro-life voice once again. In addition, the Democrat Party has become so liberal in so many other synergistic areas it is barely recognizable from the Party of even 20 years ago.

While the feminist, pro-abortion wing of the Democrat Party is exhibiting great muscle at present, a lot is on the line for them. They may not look desperate, but they really must be.

[Photos via Politico]

The feminists who cried rape

 
I wrote yesterday that Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell basically pulled a Bart Stupak.

McDonnell blew an opportunity that comes along only rarely in public life, to be an honest-to-goodness hero. Like Stupak, McDonnell more than squandered it. He ended up hurting the pro-life cause by weakening sound, proven ultrasound legislation.

But what about feminists?

They are presently congratulating themselves for cleverly equating transvaginal ultrasounds to “forcible rape,” but their victory will be short-lived.

They, too, blew it, digging themselves into a hole pro-lifers should not let them climb out of.

Abortion proponent Carole Joffe, professor at UCSF’s Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, recognized the problem in a February 29 piece she wrote at Slate entitled,”Crying rape: Pro-choice advcoates should quit calling ultrasounds rape”:

Continue reading

Someone call the president! Stupak says executive order bars contraceptive mandate

Greta Van Susteren interviewed former Congressman Bart Stupak last night to get his take on the Obama administration’s new mandate forcing religious institutions to cover contraception, abortifacients, and sterilization in their employee insurance plans.

Pro-lifers will have no trouble remembering Stupak as the leader of a group of pro-life Democrats who signed on to Obamacare in 2009 after President Obama wrote an executive order attempting to allay pro-life concerns that taxpayer funded abortions might be hidden in the bill.

But pro-lifers were not alone in saying the executive order was worth the paper it was written on. So did such renowned abortion proponents as Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards and former Obama Chief-of-Staff Rahm Emanuel.

Stupak echoed former colleague Kathy Dahlkemper’s recent contention that the executive order not only protects taxpayers from funding abortion but also protects religious healthcare entities from the contraception mandate.

Someone needs to call the president.
 

 
Stupak’s response here is incorrect (and frustrating) but relevant…

Continue reading

Life Links 11-15-11

web grab.jpgby JivinJ, host of the blog, JivinJehoshaphat

  • The decision regarding the fate of the Northern Illinois Women’s Center abortion clinic in Rockford, Illinois will wait another two weeks:

    Attorneys for the NIWC and Illinois Department of Public Health were back before Administrative Law Judge Cynthia Ramirez this morning. They were expected to announce the terms of an agreed settlement stemming from a series of state law and administrative code violations that the clinic was cited for earlier this year. Instead, they asked for more time…. Resolution in this case could range from revocation of the clinic’s license to allowing the clinic to reopen.

Continue reading

(Prolifer)ations 3-29-11

Thumbnail image for blog buzz.jpgby Susie Allen, host of the blog, Pro-Life in TN

As always, we welcome your suggestions for additions to our Top Blogs (see tab on right side of home page)! Email Susie@jillstanek.com.

  • Bryan Kemper posts the text of one man’s scheduled interview with an Atlanta, GA Planned Parenthood. Of special interest is the paranoia of the PP educator in refusing to answer some straightforward questions and PP’s refusal to allow any audio recording of the interview. PP later tried to harass one the interviewers, even contacting his supervising professor. All this from an organization that has nothing to hide.

Continue reading

Jivin J’s Life Links 3-24-11

web grab.jpgby JivinJ, host of the blog, JivinJehoshaphat

  • The Philadelphia Inquirer is reporting a court order freezing abortionist Kermit Gosnell’s assets will stay in place and Gosnell won’t try to sell any of his properties without notifying the family of Karnamaya Mongar, the woman he allegedly killed.

    The local NBC station is claiming Gosnell might sell his $900K house to pay for his defense.

Continue reading