Abortion in Healthcare Bill Remains a Puzzle for Democrats—and GOP Opponents

December 7, 2009 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (11)

By Peter Roff, Thomas Jefferson Street blog

Poor Harry Reid. For weeks, his main priority has been to get healthcare legislation through the Senate. And he's pushed hard, using just about every legislative trick available to him. Now, just when it started to look like he was making some progress comes the news that the folks back home have turned against it. In one recent statewide poll, 52 percent of Nevada voters said they didn't want the healthcare reform package Reid has been pushing so hard—and almost half of those said they were "strongly opposed," meaning they are likely to take their anger over the legislation out on their state's senior senator next November when he is once again up for re-election.

Nevada, for all of its Democrats, is not a liberal state. Reid joined the Senate leadership by proclaiming, or at least pretending, that he was a moderate who could help the leadership strike a balance with rank-and-file Democrats from places where liberalism was not the regular order of things. Now, with the House and Senate and the White House in definably liberal hands for the first time in more than a generation, Reid is caught between the national party and the folks back home, only 40 percent of whom say they are at all interested in helping him win re-election.

If he is able to find salvation it will come at the hands of his political opponents, who cannot agree on a strategy for defeating the healthcare bill. On the one hand are those who think the best way to stop the government's takeover of healthcare is to leave the bill largely as the Democrats have proposed it, to make them own every tax increase and spending hike and piece of rationing it creates. On the other are those who, fearful of its eventual passage, think the bill needs to be made as good as possible in order to mitigate the damage it might cause downstream.

Nowhere is this more clear than on the issue of abortion. Over in the House, the anti-abortion language offered by Rep. Bart Stupak, a Democrat, provided the only real hiccup Speaker Nancy Pelosi needed to suppress before moving to the vote on final passage. It made the House bill a pro-life bill by preventing the funding of abortions in the new healthcare regime and started a civil war among Democrats, a near majority of whom say that the final version of the bill going to President Obama for his signature must reflect the "pro-choice" position or they will not vote for it, in effect making the anti-abortion language a poison pill the Democrats will refuse to swallow.

Over in the Senate, the push is on to add similar language to the bill Reid is managing. Some on the right say privately that, with the abortion funding ban in both the House and Senate versions, the bill is likely to be stopped dead in its tracks. Others are not so sure. Larry Hunter, the former chief economist at the United States Chamber of Commerce who now publishes the SocialSecurity.org blog, says the inclusion of Stupak-like language in the Senate bill would actually pave the way for its eventual passage by helping Harry Reid lock in the vote of Sen. Ben Nelson, the Nebraska Democrat who has promised to vote with the Republicans to prevent anything other than an explicitly pro-life healthcare bill from coming to a vote.

Each side makes a powerful argument, but there is little predictive value in either. It is not certain House Democrats will vote down a healthcare package that includes the Stupak language, despite their bluster. They invite a near-permanent civil war on their own side if they do. It is also not certain that Nelson will keep to his commitments to the pro-lifers to vote against cloture on the Senate bill if his amendment is defeated—which leaves the Republicans on and off Capitol Hill divided on their strategy and, unintentionally, giving Reid the lifeline he needs.

Tags:
health care reform,
health care,
abortion,
Harry Reid

Reader Comments Read all comments (11)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Great stuff. (sorry for the ridiculously short comment, but what else was I supposed to say?) :)

make your own rap beats of AL 4:25AM January 12, 2010

Isn't it marvelous to watch our version of Democracy in action? All the world sits and marvels at the contortions of our elected Representatives and Senators trying to whittle this log called Health Care Reform into some recognizable and acceptable shape.

Folks in Sweden, Canada, England, and many other industrialized nations must wonder how a country with a "Defense" budget the size of ours can sweat and heave over something as important as health care for everyone. 57% of our national budget goes to "Defense," a dollar amount that totals almost as much as the combined defense budgets of the rest of the world, and here we are without universal health care coverage AND likely to end up that way after all the sweating and heaving.

Does it yet look like time to reconsider why we anguish over killing fetuses while we are in two wars and continue to figure out ways to make more likely? Is it possible we will never learn that we're our own worst enemy? REAL Health Care Reform hangs in the balance, I'd say.

Ron W. Smith of UT 5:09PM December 10, 2009

What really gets under my skin about this whole health care plan is that this is virtually the same scam that President Bill Clinton and the 103rd Congress (both Democratic, no surprise) tried to shove down our throats 15 years ago. The American people vehemently-rejected it then and do so all the more today. What part of "no" don't the Democrats understand here? We do not want our health care in the hands of impersonal, narcissistic, corrupt and egomaniacal politicians and bureaucrats who don't care a whit whether we live or die...only how much control they have over us and what the cost will amount to. Those who don't learn from past history are desined to repeat it...and if 1994 is precedent, the arrogant Democratic socialists running DC now better look out!

James of PA 8:50PM December 08, 2009

Peter Roff

Peter Roff

Peter Roff is a contributing editor at U.S. News & World Report. Formerly a senior political writer for United Press International, he’s now affiliated with several public policy organizations including Let Freedom Ring, and Frontiers of Freedom. His writing has appeared in National Review, Fox News’ opinion section, The Daily Caller, Politico and elsewhere. Follow him on Twitter @PeterRoff.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

JFK's Virtuoso Turn at the Bully Pulpit

Kennedy presented a radical idea: Peaceful coexistence.

Mary Kate Cary

A Democracy in Crisis

Can the country long survive an ever-growing government?

Latest Videos

advertisement