Let the conservatives have their little victory here, chalk up one favor owed in your quid pro quo column (“…remember how we let you have the abortion exception? Well, now you need to pay us back by giving ground on item X in the healthcare bill…”), and get the damn thing passed already. It’s called compromise, and trying to do something that benefits the most people.
What am I missing in the bigger picture here? Is this just a pissing contest, so both sides look to their constituency like they’re doing something? Or is there really something major on the line here?
Nor Should Ben Nelson.
He needs to realize that he is elected by Nebraska Democrats, rather than Nebraskans in general.
Then he needs to start voting like a Democrat.
Wasn’t that the problem in the first place, for some pro-lifers? That originally abortion wasn’t specifically mentioned, meaning doctors could treat patients and abortion could be covered?
That’s not including women who have no insurance, or those whose policies don’t cover it. From your link
Trouble is, there are any number of democrats - at least in certain places - who Don’t support abortion rights. If you have a Senator - who is a democrat - but who knows that his particular constituency has enough ‘pro-lifers’ that he can gain some political capital by getting up on a soap box over this particular issue, he will.
I don’t get it. What does an abortion cost? Three or four hundred bucks? That doesn’t even meet a deductible. I can’t imagine that either way this provision would affect anymore than a handful of women.
I’m for healthcare reform. It’s badly needed. However, I have to agree with your Senator. The proposed legislation is too big, too unwieldy and moving too fast. The Democrats blew it, the Republicans played spoilers, and Obama is turning out to be ineffective as a true leader.
Exactly. Granted for some that is a lot of money, but it isn’t so much that most people couldn’t somehow scrape it together even when they are in a pinch.
And if you couldn’t scrape it together, aren’t there places that will provide abortions at little to no cost?
A similar dynamic could exist in the Senate, with anti-abortion Democrats preventing final approval of the health care bill if they don’t like the abortion language.
Obama turns out to be ineffective because of the health care bill? So far he’s come closer to passing health care reform than any president. His knuckling under to the military and intensifying the occupation of Afghanistan, well that is another story, but then that’s not the subject of this thread.
So, ALL of the Republicans and a sorry few of the Democrats are thuggish neanderthals who don’t know how to say anything but “No” and it’s OBAMA that’s ineffective? Doesn’t the fact that one entire whole party has committed to being nothing but a speed bump ON EVERYTHING count for anything?
Not if you believe the health care bill is a big mistake. I’m of the opinion that abortion is a handy thing to cancel the bill on, but it’s probably not the main issue. I just wish people who were against this bill would say why. It’s too big, it’s unmanagable, and it’s too damn expensive. With all of the money being spent that we don’t have, flushing this bill would be the most prudent thing our government could do right now.
/slight hijack
On abortion, I have a question… does anyone know how the abortion pill has been working in Europe? Any major side effects? A pill has to be cheaper than an operation.
And is the reason why the abortion pill is not available in this country the result of politics or real concerns of side effects?
He means that there are too many Republicans in office to allow America to oversee UHC like every other country in the world manages to do. I think there is something about hair combed to within an inch of its life that robs the brain underneath of intelligence.
Meh. Medicare/Medicaid and Social Security get along alright despite occasional Republican grumbling, I suspect UHC will do alright as well, for similar reasons.
