The Washington Times
  • Subscribe
  • Times News Services
  • RSS
  • Mobile Headlines
  • e-edition
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • REGISTER
  • LOG IN
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • WELCOME
  • Your Profile
  • Log Out


  • Front Page Image
  • Classifieds
  • Autos
  • Real Estate
  • Jobs
  • Special Sections
  • Customer Service
  • Home
  • News
    • World
    • National
    • Politics
    • National Security
    • DC Area
    • Business
    • Entertainment
    • Technology
    • Investigations
    • Faith
    • Energy
    • Environment
    • Headlines
    • Citizen Journalism
  • Opinion
    • Editorials
    • Commentary
    • Columns
    • Water Cooler
    • Letters
    • Cartoons
    • Books
  • Sports
  • Culture
    • Home & Living
    • Family & Kids
    • Fashion
    • Food
    • Travel
    • Health
    • Washington Visitors
    • Books
    • Military History
    • Life
    • Auto
    • TV Listings
    • Movie Listings
    • Death Notices
    • Entertainment
  • Communities
  • Rebate Shopping
    • Stores
    • Coupons
    • Daily Double
    • Promotion
    • How It Works
  • Photos
  • Podcasts
    • About Headlines
    • Audio and Radio
    • America's Morning News
  • TWT BLOGS: Latest
  • Staff blogs
  • Create a blog

Abortion foes voting 'yes' on health care bill were played

By Kerry Picket on Nov. 8, 2009 into Water Cooler

  • Subscribe

***Update: Audio of Rep.Henry Waxman interview and videos of floor questioning from Minority Leader John Boehner 

H.R. 3962, America's Healthy Future Act, passed the House yesterday evening 215 to 220 after several hours of debate. Amid floor speeches, pro-life congressmen were also successful in writing in the pro-life oriented Stupak-Pitts amendment. Pro-life groups were excited over the passage of the amendment and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) urged the passage of the amendment.

 However, during questioning from the press prior the passage of the Stupak-Pitts amendment, the Washington Times asked Rep.Henry Waxman (D - Calif.) if the amendment could be changed later on after the eventual passage of H.R. 3962 last night.: AUDIO

“The bill, if it passes, will be up in conference with what the Senate passes, and then we will have to work there to resolve differences and to fashion one bill that we will then kick back to our respective chambers to get the president to sign after we pass it.”

Rep. Joseph Cao (R-La.) was the only Republican to vote for H.R. 3962 and cited the Stupak-Pitts amendment as a reason why he could vote for the Democratic health care bill:

  “Before the Stupak-Pitts amendment was adopted as part of this health reform bill, the bill failed to explicitly include the longstanding policy prohibiting federal funding of elective abortion and plans which include elective abortion.” 

 “Thank [sic] to the Stupak-Pitts Amendment, taxpayer dollars will not go to supporting elective abortions, and for thousands of my constituents, this was a top priority.  By incorporating this amendment into the health reform bill, my colleagues and I made this bill better, and that is an achievement of which I will always be proud.”

While pro-choice advocates were "furious" over the consideration and eventual passage of the amendment, House Minority  Leader John Boehner (R-Oh.) questioned Mr. Waxman, Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), and Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) about whether or not the Stupak - Pitts amendment would remain in the bill after it goes to conference, but none of the Democratic congressmen were willing to give Mr. Boehner a straight answer.

 

 

I can't guarantee you anything," said Mr. Rangel.

Mr. Boehner responded, "it is quite clear this could be a shell game underway. . . . I have my doubts this language if it passes has any chance of being in the final version of the bill."

Pro-life forces may have made their point, but at what cost? The Democrats and their pro-choice allies are not done with this bill yet, and any pro-life organization or congressman who thinks otherwise is fooling themselves.

  • Bookmark and Share
  • Comment

There are 4 Comments

hinckleybuzzard

One problem with single issue zealots is that they are easily rolled, as this fiasco illustrates. There are an abundance of good reasons to have opposed this monstrosity, but the tunnel vision of the hardcore prolifers rendered them insignificant. As a result, they will have not only colluded in greater numbers of abortions, they will have undermined freedoms for the rest of us. Thanks guys. Nice work..
Mark as offensive

antonio_sosa

Thanks for the article. Of course they were played. Obama and his accomplices LIED again to force us to swallow their Obamacare SCAM. But lies do not change Obama's pro-abortion and pro-infanticide (late-term abortion) stand, nor the aberrant stands (based on eugenics) of Obama's Health Care Czar Ezekiel Emanuel and Science Czar John Holdren. Obama's Health Care Czar Ezekiel Emanuel, rightfully called "Doctor Death," would make Dr. Kervorkian proud. Dr. Emanuel has said that "Medical care should not be given to those who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens." As per Dr. Emanuel, your mother suffering from Alzheimer’s or your child diagnosed with Down’s Syndrome SHOULD NOT receive medical care. http://freedomedium.com/2009/07/barack-obama-appoints-doctor-death-as-health-care-czar/ And Obama's "Science Czar" John Holdren has called for population-control policies such as forced abortions, mass sterilizations, and mandatory population controls. http://www.prisonplanet.com/john-holdren-obamas-science-czar-forced-abortions-and-mass-sterilization-needed-to-save-the-planet.html Lies do not change the FACT that we are broke and Obamacare will further destroy our economy, our future and the future of our children and grandchildren. Lies do not change the FACT that Obamacare is another scam to enslave us.
Mark as offensive

margaretbx

The author of this article does not understand how the legislative process works. The House and Senate members of the conference committee will negotiate over the differences between their bills. No one can right now promise that any particular part of the bill will stay or go. Will the Senate vote for a Stupak Amendment? We don't even know that yet. Every member of the House and Senate will have to vote for or against the final bill after the conference committee. So Congressman Cao, for example, does not have to vote for conference report (That is, real final passage of the bill), if he does not like the version that comes out of the conference committee.
Mark as offensive

William_Wilberforce

Actually hinckleybuzzard, you have it absolutely upside down. The single issue zealots as you derisively call us, would not have voted for the Stupak amendment because it allows public funding of abortions for cases of rape, incest, and the life of the mother. We also knew that passage of the amendment would not mean anything, since, if the bill passes it will still have to be reconciled. Either way, it looks as if the "public option" and the "abortion victory" are both lost on the Senate. What it comes down to is this. "Pro-life" organizations, that you naively think are actually interested in ending abortion as their single issue, are really fundraising and political interest groups, and they could care less about the actual result, as long as what they do is perceived as a victory (See. this youtube video: http://tinyurl.com/ya4fgeo)
Mark as offensive

Please login or register to post a comment

Advertising Links
TWT Store
  • e-edition
  • Print Edition
  • Weekly Washington Times
TWT Affiliates
  • Middle East Times
  • Golf
  • UPI
  • Arbor Ballroom
  • Washington Times Global
  • About TWT
  • Press Room
  • F.A.Q.
  • Work for TWT
  • Advertise
  • Sponsors
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Site Map

All site contents © Copyright 2009 The Washington Times, LLC.