Stabenow ‘Offended’ by Abortion Amendment

By
Wednesday, September 30, 2009 at 11:23 am

The Senate Finance Committee this morning shot down an amendment, offered by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), that would have explicitly prohibited federal funds from subsidizing abortion coverage under plans purchased on a new insurance marketplace, dubbed the exchange, which would be created under the committee’s health reform bill.

The Hatch amendment would have allowed women to buy abortion coverage through unsubsidized supplemental plans, called riders. Hatch said it would simply codify the so-called Hyde amendment, which already prohibits federal funding of abortions, but must be renewed each year through the appropriations process.

“That’s not asking a lot,” Hatch said. “It’s not trying to change the law.”

But that argument didn’t fly with most Democrats. Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) said, “As a woman, I find it offensive. This is an unprecedented restriction on people who pay for their own health insurance.”

And Finance Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont), emphasizing that his bill already prohibits federal funding of abortions, said the Hatch amendment is “discrimination against women to have them get a rider for a private plan.”

The amendment failed 10 to 13.

Comments

5 Comments

lawrencereves
Comment posted September 30, 2009 @ 5:51 pm

In truth, it is offensive that the Democrats, who claim to care so much about women, will not restrict the single, most dangerous, action against women today. If this was an amendment restricting drug use, it would have support across the board. However, since this would restrict the sacred cow of the Left, then we have this great debate going on.

Abortion is harmful to a great number of women every year, not to mention the children that die as a result of it. The Democrats need to stop playing politics with it & REALLY help women by restricting abortion as much as possible.


strangely_enough
Comment posted September 30, 2009 @ 5:57 pm

Amazing level of dishonesty.


DD
Comment posted September 30, 2009 @ 10:54 pm

Republicans have been hollering at the top of their lungs about Government control of health decisions, that the Government should not come between a doctor and a patient. The amendment is just another hypocritical move by Republicans. If the Republicans are stating in black and white that the Government should not interfere with doctor-patient relationships, then they should take the bad with the good. That is not apply their principles to one area while withholding them from another.


louis vuitton outlet
Comment posted December 2, 2010 @ 3:49 am

. If the Republicans are stating in black and white that the Government should not interfere with doctor-patient relationships, then they should take the bad with the good.


louis vuitton outlet
Comment posted December 2, 2010 @ 3:49 am

. If the Republicans are stating in black and white that the Government should not interfere with doctor-patient relationships, then they should take the bad with the good.


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.