One of the most difficult things about writing this blog is the fact that I'm not just providing news, but co-opting news with opinion. As a long-term reporter who has had "just the facts" forever pushed into my brain function, it's difficult to come to the keyboard with the dual purpose of providing factual information and to issue a call to action based on that information.
But, as I told the women gathered in Sioux City this weekend, there are times we have to step outside of our comfort zones in order to stand up for things that we believe in or to right a wrong.
While I drove across Iowa on Saturday, members of the U.S. House of Representatives voted on an unprecedented health care reform bill. The good and bad news is all rolled up in one sentence: It passed. This is good news because it is a first step on a path the country should have taken years and years ago. It is bad news because once again special interest groups have had their way and a segment of the population was marginalized.
A group of 64 Democrats joined with every single Republican member of the House to vote in favor of an amendment offered by Bart Stupak, a Democratic representative of Michigan. The amendment, which wasn't completely unexpected, blocks anyone using government subsidies to buy insurance from purchasing a plan that covers abortion, even if the abortion coverage is paid for completely with private premiums.
Back up and read that again. Even if a woman has her own money and is willing to use that money to purchase abortion coverage, she cannot do so.
This is an extreme and unprecedented departure from how the bill previously curtailed the use of government/taxpayer funds for abortion. Prior to the Stupak-Pitts amendment, or language, being added into the House bill, government-provided "affordability credits" were required to be segregated from individually paid premiums so that they it could be ensured that federal funds were not used to provide abortion coverage. In essence, only women or families that were spending enough of their own funds to pay for the increased premiums associated with abortion coverage could purchase that type of insurance.
So, prior to the Stupak-Pitts Amendment, the status quo regarding abortion was maintained. With this new language, accessibility to reproductive health care has been further negated and regulated beyond the scope of what was previously believed to be a "workable compromise."
Because the language only currently appears in the House version of the bill, it is important to keep similar language out of the U.S. Senate version. To that end, phone your senator and let him/her know that you don't approve of any language that disrupts the status quo in relation to insurance coverage for abortion services.
If the Senate bill maintains its current language, which is based on the existing status quo which is built on the Hyde Amendment, then the conference committee that merges the two bills will have the option to either include the Stupak-Pitts language or remove it.
If it is removed, then let all of your representatives know that you support the bill and want them to vote in favor.
If it is NOT removed, you are going to have a decision to make on whether or not you believe health care reform is worth the further erosion of access to abortion.
After debating this back and forth in my head for more than 48 hours, my decision is that a bill that does not include all necessary access for women and families isn't really reform. To that end, I have contact my U.S. House Representative's office to encourage him to join the growing list of members who have signed on to a letter that is being sent to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. It reads, at least in part, as follows:
If, when all of this is said and done, there is no health care reform bill, don't blame women. Don't credit those who disrupted numerous town hall meetings throughout the month of August. Don't allow Republicans to gloat on how they killed reform. The credit and/or blame lies solely with the 64 Democrats in the U.S. House, and whatever members of the U.S. Senate, that view reform as an opportunity to restrict access.
(Hat Tip: The Plum Line)
But, as I told the women gathered in Sioux City this weekend, there are times we have to step outside of our comfort zones in order to stand up for things that we believe in or to right a wrong.
While I drove across Iowa on Saturday, members of the U.S. House of Representatives voted on an unprecedented health care reform bill. The good and bad news is all rolled up in one sentence: It passed. This is good news because it is a first step on a path the country should have taken years and years ago. It is bad news because once again special interest groups have had their way and a segment of the population was marginalized.
A group of 64 Democrats joined with every single Republican member of the House to vote in favor of an amendment offered by Bart Stupak, a Democratic representative of Michigan. The amendment, which wasn't completely unexpected, blocks anyone using government subsidies to buy insurance from purchasing a plan that covers abortion, even if the abortion coverage is paid for completely with private premiums.
Back up and read that again. Even if a woman has her own money and is willing to use that money to purchase abortion coverage, she cannot do so.
This is an extreme and unprecedented departure from how the bill previously curtailed the use of government/taxpayer funds for abortion. Prior to the Stupak-Pitts amendment, or language, being added into the House bill, government-provided "affordability credits" were required to be segregated from individually paid premiums so that they it could be ensured that federal funds were not used to provide abortion coverage. In essence, only women or families that were spending enough of their own funds to pay for the increased premiums associated with abortion coverage could purchase that type of insurance.
So, prior to the Stupak-Pitts Amendment, the status quo regarding abortion was maintained. With this new language, accessibility to reproductive health care has been further negated and regulated beyond the scope of what was previously believed to be a "workable compromise."
Because the language only currently appears in the House version of the bill, it is important to keep similar language out of the U.S. Senate version. To that end, phone your senator and let him/her know that you don't approve of any language that disrupts the status quo in relation to insurance coverage for abortion services.
If the Senate bill maintains its current language, which is based on the existing status quo which is built on the Hyde Amendment, then the conference committee that merges the two bills will have the option to either include the Stupak-Pitts language or remove it.
If it is removed, then let all of your representatives know that you support the bill and want them to vote in favor.
If it is NOT removed, you are going to have a decision to make on whether or not you believe health care reform is worth the further erosion of access to abortion.
After debating this back and forth in my head for more than 48 hours, my decision is that a bill that does not include all necessary access for women and families isn't really reform. To that end, I have contact my U.S. House Representative's office to encourage him to join the growing list of members who have signed on to a letter that is being sent to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. It reads, at least in part, as follows:
As Members of Congress we believe that women should have access to a full range of reproductive health care. Health Care reform must not be misused as an opportunity to restrict women's access to reproductive health services.
The Stupak-Pitts amendment to H.R. 3932, The Affordable Healthcare for America Act, represents an unprecedented and unacceptable restriction on women's ability to access the full range of reproductive health services to which they are entitled. We will not vote for a conference report that contains language that restricts women's right to choose any further than the current law.
If, when all of this is said and done, there is no health care reform bill, don't blame women. Don't credit those who disrupted numerous town hall meetings throughout the month of August. Don't allow Republicans to gloat on how they killed reform. The credit and/or blame lies solely with the 64 Democrats in the U.S. House, and whatever members of the U.S. Senate, that view reform as an opportunity to restrict access.
(Hat Tip: The Plum Line)
Leave a comment