As we enter the dog days of August, and our elected officials take a much needed break, the health care debate drags on. And that’s a good thing. While some in both houses in Congress admit not personally reading the various proposals the media and bloggers are having a field day. It’s easy when you have over 1,000 pages of “work in process” to chew on.
One issue that sends up our antennas is the topic of federal funding of abortions.
Associated Press writer RICARDO ALONSOZALDIVAR just addressed this controversial issue in his latest article.
“Gov’t insurance would allow coverage for abortion.”
In his piece Ricardo opens stating: “Health care legislation before Congress would allow a new government-sponsored insurance plan to cover abortions, a decision that would affect millions of women and recast federal policy on the divisive issue.
Federal funds for abortions are now restricted to cases involving rape, incest or danger to the health of the mother. Abortion opponents say those restrictions should carry over to any health insurance sold through a new marketplace envisioned under the legislation, an exchange where people would choose private coverage or the public plan.
Abortion rights supporters say that would have the effect of denying coverage for abortion to millions of women who now have it through workplace insurance and are expected to join the exchange.
Advocates on both sides are preparing for a renewed battle over abortion, which could jeopardize political support for President Barack Obama’s health care initiative aimed at covering nearly 50 million uninsured and restraining medical costs.
“We want to see people who have no health insurance get it, but this is a sticking point,” said Richard Doerflinger, associate director of pro-life activities for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. “We don’t want health care reform to be the vehicle for mandating abortion.”
Ricardo closes by quoting Heidi Hartmann, president of the Institute for Women’s Policy Research, adding this comment. Applying the current restrictions for federal employees and low-income women to a program intended for the middle class will provoke a backlash.
“There is a difference between picking off one group of women here and one group there and something that would affect a very large group,” Hartmann said. “Everyone would like to avoid that fight.”
Gilbert final thoughts. This fight has just begun. The president is discovering that having all the cards and controlling both houses on paper is not a slam dunk on his Socialist driven Agenda.
Thanks to Blue Dog Democrats and others who put constituents interests before bowing at the Pelosi altar. They may pay a political price but freedom is not free.
Ricardo’s full report can be read below.
http://asia.news.yahoo.com/ap/20090805/twl-us-health-care-overhaul-abortion-ef375f8.html
Larry,
Why does the anti-abortion crowd feel they have the right to dictate how “their” tax dollars are spent?
I am/was personally against our war in Iraq, I find it morally objectionable to kill and maim other human beings unnecessarily, yet I am on the hook for thousands of dollars for that debacle along with every other tax payer.
Why is their moral objection given more consideration than mine?
As to the Blue Dog Democrats putting their “constituents interests before bowing at the altar of Pelosi”, you might want to check out how much MONEY those Blue Dogs are RAKING in FROM the INSURANCE COMPANIES and their LOBBYISTS, 25% MORE than other Democrats but NOT AS MUCH AS REPUBLICANS.
Can you say; BOUGHT AND PAID FOR?
#1
Anonster-” I am personally against our war in Iraq, I FIND IT MORALLY OBJECTIONABLE TO KILL AND MAIN OTHER HUMAN BEINGS”
But is that not what ABORTION is?? Killing of a HUMAN BEING??
How can you be for one and not the other??
Anonster.
I tip my hat to you. You may be onto something. Campaign contributions to the Blue Dog Democrats from the insurance industry. Given time that needs to be investigated. In fact I would not focus solely on one side of the aisle in that research.
New topic, triggered by your war comment.
Before cancelling my daily subscription to the LA Times I always saw a running tally with photos of American servicemen and women KIA during the later days of Bush 43’s term in office. Somehow that constant reminder of the loss of American lives in the current administration is not in the daily news accounts of the war in Afghanistan. The last time I gave blood it was red as is everyone else’s. The opposition does not ask for your voter registration when attacking our servicemen and women.
That said why isn’t the print media placing the same microscope on president Obama’s war?
In July 42 Americans were killed in Afghanistan making it the bloodiest month for U.S.troops.
Query. Didn’t candidate Obama set a timeframe for bringing ALL US troops home in his campaign?
I don’t think Afghanistan would be my choice for R & R.
I am pro-choice because of my consern for life. Outlawing or not funding abortions will not stop them. It will just result as it did in the past to increased risk to the women who will opt for unsafe proceedures, like coat hangers.
I think we need to encourage people to use birth control if they are going to have sex, safe sex or if they can abstenance, until marriage and make sure that adoption is a viable option by increase funding.
I would urge everyone who opposes choice to volunteer to adopt at least one unwanted child and or donate to an adoption agency. Government should also put in some funding.
Larry,
You are totally on to something about the press coverage of the ongoing war. I wish I could see some actual numbers, but I suspect the same thing. Its like the media uses creative editing to create a kind of reality-show-fiction out of real events, dictated by a political agenda.
#3
I think Obama was quite clear during the campaign that he thought Afghanistan was left unfinished and was where the US needed to focus its attention.
I have always been uneasy about Afghanistan, but having gone in, I think we owe it to the Afghanis and for our own safety, to leave a stable country and not the unfinished mess that Bush left, and as much as I was against the Iraq war, I have never been for a rapid pull-out there for the same reasons.
The press stopped covering Afghanistan as soon as we attacked Iraq and they stopped covering Iraq in 2007.
anonster.
You are wrong, wrong, wrong.
I was still getting the LA Times every day long after 2007 and saw photos of American GI’s KIA on a regular basis.
Kindly explain for our other readers your comment that “I think we owe it to the Afghanis and for our own safety,” Now shift the name and say Iraq
what’s the difference other then Obama Vs Bush 43
I always supported going after those in Afghanistan that attacked us or worked with our attackers to either defend them or attack us.
We have the right and obligation to defend ourselves.
We had no right in my thinking to attack Iraq, as bad as their leader was to the people there, they did not attack us or had they attacked a ally of ours in the area since the 1st Gulf War.
Rallies and protests against the Iraq invasion created a lot of interest in the press. It was good for ratings and profits one would think. Afganistan to this point has not generated as much controversy therefore lower rating for covering it and less advertising $$. Perhaps that is why there is less coverage of Afganistan,
or perhaps I am a cynic.
The Bush Administration did order the media not to cover caskets coming back, a prohibition that Obama has lifted.
Clearly at this point we cannot simply pull out of Iraq. When Saddam was there he simply killed off any possible threats to his power including Al Quieda. The new government must be stable
and we appear to be on the right course to get our troops out on schedule.
#7 Larry,
The newspapers continue to report on both Iraq and Afghanistan, although I’m sure they’ve pulled back on the number of field reporters, but it really doesn’t matter what the newspapers report anyway, because in this country, if it’s not on TV it didn’t happen.
You also need to keep in mind that we don’t have nearly as many soldiers in Afghanistan as we have in Iraq. As of 7/09 we had 128,000 troops still left in Iraq (no coalition troops remain) and as of 4/09 the US had 30,000 troops in Afghanistan along with 35,000 NATO troops.
In my search to find current troop levels, I came across numerous recent articles on Afghanistan, from the MSM and both right and left wing news sources, but again, they were print and if it’s not on TV, no one knows about it.
anonster, are you tomahawk from Red County? If so, remember me? I had fun on there a few years ago, until the Jannys and the Trannies kicked me out, with your blessings as I recall.
Oh well, nice seeing you again.
Lam Pho ( sheep soup?) 😉
U used to post at RedCounty as a blogger? Did u ask their permission to post here? Just trying to help u stay out of BIG trouble!
Lam Pho ( sheep soup?) hahaha, pretty good.
When I first posted over at RedCounty, I picked a silly moniker like “lam pho”, which in my mind was Lam = make Pho = soup. Before you know it, the Jannys and Trannies were trying figure out who I was, and connecting me with people whose names were “Lam” or “Phu” or “Phuc”… Funny as hell.
LOL.
Sounds like Rcounty is crawling with J&T ‘sherlocks’!