Health bill condemned by pro-lifers
Baptist Press and Local ReportsWASHINGTON (BP and local reports) — The U.S. House of Representatives passed a controversial health-care bill March 21, deeply disappointing pro-life Americans who hoped a small group of Democrats would block legislation they say will permit federal funding of abortion and likely increase the rate of the procedure.
Mississippi Con-gressmen Travis Childers and Gene Taylor, both Demo-crats, voted against the bill along with Republican Gregg Harper. Democrat Bennie Thompson voted in favor of the legislation.
Childers is a member of East Booneville Church, Booneville. Harper is a member of Crossgates Chuch, Brandon. Taylor is Catholic and Thomp-son is Methodist.
In announcing his opposition prior to the vote, Childers said, “I have reviewed the bill and I remain deeply concerned about the legislation’s large price tag and the absence of sufficiently strong language to prohibit federal funding of abortion.
“While I voted against the last House health care reform bill, I supported the Stupak Amendment to prevent taxpayer dollars from being used to fund abortion. The current legislation lacks equally strong language.
Also prior to the vote, Harper said, “Democratic leaders in Congress say their bill will reduce the deficit. That’s not true. This flawed legislation will raise taxes over a half-trillion dollars during one of the toughest economic downturns in American history.”
“Raising taxes, cutting Medicare and creating a new entitlement program is not health care reform.”
“Taxpayers cannot afford a new federal health insurance program,” Taylor said before casting his vote. “I do not support creating a whole new health care program, but I do support smaller reforms to make the current system more effective for taxpayers and consumers.”
Thompson did not respond to a request for comment from The Baptist Record. In addition, a “Connection Refused” message was transmitted from Thompson’s official web site to The Baptist Record when a second request was attempted on the morning of March 23.
With only Democrats voting in favor, the House approved a U.S. Senate version of health-care reform in a 219-212 vote late in the night. Thirty-four Democrats joined all 178 Republicans in voting against the measure.
Among Southern Baptists serving in the House, only Al Green of Texas voted in favor of the measure.
The Democrats followed passage of the Senate bill by turning back a Republican procedural move that would have included the insertion of pro-life language and by approving a reconciliation bill that incorporated “fixes” to the legislation they had just passed.
U.S. President Barak Obama signed the Senate bill into law on March 23. The Senate still must approve the reconciliation measure, which, if changed, will return to the House for approval before going to the president.
The clinching votes for the massive health-care measure, which is expected to cost — when combined with the reconciliation bill — $940 billion over 10 years, were assured earlier in the day. It was announced Michigan Rep. Bart Stupak, who had led the pro-life Democrats’ effort to prevent abortion funding in the bill, and six allies, according to The Washington Post, agreed to a proposed executive order to be issued by Obama after he signs the bill.
The Senate bill “maintains current law,” but the pending order “provides additional safeguards to ensure” the longstanding ban on federal funding of abortion is enforced, the White House said. Stupak said in a written release the order “upholds the principle that federal funds should not be used to subsidize abortion coverage.”
Pro-life advocates inside and outside the House, however, denied the Senate bill prohibits taxpayer support for abortion and rejected the proposed executive order as ineffective. They pointed out the president could rescind his order at any time and contended the federal courts would rule in favor of the language in the law, not in the executive order. Some also expressed deep disappointment in Stupak.
Southern Baptist ethicist Richard Land, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention in Nashville, said pro-life Americans “are rightly both chagrined and disillusioned” with Stu-pak’s action.
“Pro-lifers are justified in their outrage, since it was apparently Stupak and his Democratic pro-life coalition that provided the margin of victory for ObamaCare,” said Land. Stupak’s “pathetic defense that President Obama’s executive order sufficiently protects the unborn in this new legislation strains credulity. It’s equivalent to saying that a bikini can cover the fat lady in the circus. The executive order is insufficient and does not carry the force of law equivalent to the legislation.”
The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC) said the pending Obama order “changes nothing. It does not correct any of the serious pro-abortion provisions in the bill. The president cannot amend a bill by issuing an order, and the federal courts will enforce what the law says.”
The executive order also does not correct the newly passed bill’s lack of protection for the conscience rights of pro-life health-care workers, according to NRLC.
Stupak and pro-life Republican Rep. Joseph Pitts of Pennsylvania faced off in floor debate after the House approved the Senate-passed legislation. They had worked together in November to sponsor an amendment that barred federal funds from being used to pay for abortions or to subsidize abortion coverage.
The House approved that pro-life amendment, which enabled passage of the overall bill last year. The Senate, however, refused to include the Stupak-Pitts language when it took up the House version.
Obama’s promised executive order is “full of loopholes,” Pitts said in urging passage of a motion to recommit the bill to a committee with instructions to include the Stupak-Pitts language.
“The Senate bill departs from long-standing current policy and achieves the exact opposite effect of current law, and an executive order promised by the president will not change these facts,” Pitts said. “An executive order does not trump a statute, and the courts undoubtedly will look to the legislative text to interpret the law. Moreover, the promised order fails to even correct the egregious pro-life concerns contained in this bill… The abortion rate will rise, and more unborn lives will be lost.”
With Democrats applauding him, Stupak spoke against the effort to recommit and to include the language he originally championed.
“The motion to recommit purports to be a right-to-life motion in the spirit of the Stupak amendment, but as the author of the Stupak amendment, this motion is nothing more than an opportunity to continue to deny 32 million Americans health care,” Stupak said. “[T]his motion does not promote life… It is Democrats through the president’s executive order that assure the sanctity of life is protected, because all life is precious and all life should be honored.
“For the unborn child, his or her mother will finally have pre- and post-natal care under our bill.... For the Republicans to now claim that we send the bill back to committee under the guise of protecting life is disingenuous. This motion really is to politicize life, not prioritize life.”
Democratic Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland urged rejection of the Republicans’ motion to recommit, saying the Senate would not support it and the GOP is “indirectly trying to kill this bill.”
Democrats defeated the motion 232-199, with 21 members of their party joining the Republicans in support. The House then approved the reconciliation bill of amendments in a 220-211 roll call. This time, 33 Democrats voted with the GOP in opposition.
Pro-life advocates say the version approved by senators in December and by representatives March 21 could dramatically increase the number of abortions. It permits the funding of insurance plans that cover elective abortions, reversing a long-standing federal policy. Congress’ own insurance plans, for example, cannot cover abortions. The bill requires that anyone who has a plan that covers abortion — even men and elderly women — must pay a separate fee to cover abortion, in addition to their premium.
The legislation also appropriates seven billion dollars to the country’s 1,200-plus community health centers without stipulating the money cannot be used for elective abortions, pro-life organizations say. Planned Parent-hood, the country’s largest abortion provider, supported the bill and argued it would “significantly increase access to reproductive health care.”
During a press conference, Stupak said the executive order would ensure that federal dollars don’t go toward funding elective abortions at community health centers. Stupak also said the order would strengthen conscience protections for health care workers.
A pair of pro-life organizations criticized his change of heart on the legislation. The Susan B. Anthony List announced it would no longer present him with a Defender of Life award it had planned to give him March 24. CatholicVote.com said it had rescinded its invitation for Stupak to speak at an April meeting.
Land said House passage of legislation disfavored by so many Americans would result in a “tsunami-size voter backlash.”