# Liberals: Would You Support An Abortion Ban In Exchange For A UHC Bill and Immigration Reform **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 21, 2010, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-would-you-support-an-abortion-ban-in-exchange-for-a-uhc-bill-and-immigration-reform/533276 "2010-03-21T22:45:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-would-you-support-an-abortion-ban-in-exchange-for-a-uhc-bill-and-immigration-reform/533276/101 "2010-03-22T14:54:21Z")
Newsmax. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Good one. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-would-you-support-an-abortion-ban-in-exchange-for-a-uhc-bill-and-immigration-reform/533276/102 "2010-03-22T14:56:22Z")
No. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-would-you-support-an-abortion-ban-in-exchange-for-a-uhc-bill-and-immigration-reform/533276/103 "2010-03-22T14:58:26Z")
By the way, there’s no “free ride,” if you get sick after deciding to pay the $1000 fine instead of buying health insurance. You’d still have to pay your own medical bills AND pay the fine. We haven’t socialized anything. You’ll still get billed. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-would-you-support-an-abortion-ban-in-exchange-for-a-uhc-bill-and-immigration-reform/533276/104 "2010-03-22T15:18:33Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Newsmax. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Good one. I honestly have no idea who newsmax is or why it’d be funny but ok. The paying of the medical bills come after the insurance kicks in, correct? They can’t deny me coverage due to a pre-existing condition. Therefore that $1000 dollar fine may have saved me tens of thousands if not more. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-would-you-support-an-abortion-ban-in-exchange-for-a-uhc-bill-and-immigration-reform/533276/105 "2010-03-22T15:22:13Z")
Preexisting conditions does not mean preexisting bills. ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-would-you-support-an-abortion-ban-in-exchange-for-a-uhc-bill-and-immigration-reform/533276/106 "2010-03-22T15:24:16Z")
> [@Curtis LeMay](#): > > In response to a thread about how many religious conservatives object to a UHC bill because they believe it will fund abortions would you support a deal with religious conservatives to support an unilateral ban on abortion by constitutional amendment except if the mother’s life is threatened in exchange for a comprehensive universal health care bill and immigration reform? I certainly would, but I am a rare duck who is anti-abortion and pro-UHC and pro-immigration anyway. Although in practical terms, I wouldn’t support a constitutional amendment banning abortion as an end in itself. I’m not a big fan of amendments that restrict rights, as opposed to those that enumerate them. ---
**Author:** ![Mr\_Smashy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/2bfe46/32.png) [@Mr\_Smashy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr_Smashy)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-would-you-support-an-abortion-ban-in-exchange-for-a-uhc-bill-and-immigration-reform/533276/107 "2010-03-22T15:25:43Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > No it isn’t. Don’t believe everything you hear on the radio. And please don’t believe everything you read on HuffPo. The [CBO](http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/48xx/doc4816/doc38.pdf) knew this way back in 1994 (pdf): > [@](#): > > A mandate requiring all individuals to purchase health insurance would be an unprecedented form of federal action. The government has never required > people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the > United States. An individual mandate would have two features that, in > combination, would make it unique. First, it would impose a duty on > individuals as members of society. Second, it would require people to purchase > a specific service that would be heavily regulated by the federal government. Under enumerated powers, if it’s not in there, Congress shouldn’t be doing it. Please cite the part of the constitution that gives Congress the power to mandate that an individual enter into a contract with a private party to purchase a good or service. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-would-you-support-an-abortion-ban-in-exchange-for-a-uhc-bill-and-immigration-reform/533276/108 "2010-03-22T15:32:03Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > Under enumerated powers, if it’s not in there, Congress shouldn’t be doing it. Please cite the part of the constitution that gives Congress the power to mandate that an individual enter into a contract with a private party to purchase a good or service. [A little light reading for you.](http://www.healthreformwatch.com/2009/08/25/is-it-unconstitutional-to-mandate-health-insurance/) Precis: the Constitution does not explicitly give Congress the power to mandate that an individual enter into a contract with a private party. The body of Constitutional law does. ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-would-you-support-an-abortion-ban-in-exchange-for-a-uhc-bill-and-immigration-reform/533276/109 "2010-03-22T15:45:02Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > Under enumerated powers, if it’s not in there, Congress shouldn’t be doing it. Please cite the part of the constitution that gives Congress the power to mandate that an individual enter into a contract with a private party to purchase a good or service. Here ya go: > [@](#): > > The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration. US Constitution Amendment 16. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-would-you-support-an-abortion-ban-in-exchange-for-a-uhc-bill-and-immigration-reform/533276/110 "2010-03-22T15:50:15Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > And please don’t believe everything you read on HuffPo. > > The [CBO](http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/48xx/doc4816/doc38.pdf) knew this way back in 1994 (pdf): > > Under enumerated powers, if it’s not in there, Congress shouldn’t be doing it. Please cite the part of the constitution that gives Congress the power to mandate that an individual enter into a contract with a private party to purchase a good or service. Commerce clause. This is a non-starter, but the impotent threats of the right are very entertaining. ---
**Author:** ![Mr\_Smashy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/2bfe46/32.png) [@Mr\_Smashy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr_Smashy)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-would-you-support-an-abortion-ban-in-exchange-for-a-uhc-bill-and-immigration-reform/533276/111 "2010-03-22T15:59:13Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > [A little light reading for you.](http://www.healthreformwatch.com/2009/08/25/is-it-unconstitutional-to-mandate-health-insurance/) > > Precis: the Constitution does not explicitly give Congress the power to mandate that an individual enter into a contract with a private party. The body of Constitutional law does. Good link! Here’s the difference. Your guy says > [@](#): > > Considering (1), Congress has ample power and precedent through the Constitution’s “Commerce Clause” to regulate just about any aspect of the national economy. The problem is, that only applies to those who willingly choose to engage in a specific economic activity. There’s a difference between regulating what people choose to engage in, and forcing people to engage in activities with private parties. We could get into discussions of the 1942 Wickard vs Filburn (which regulated wheat through quotas) or Gonzales vs Raich (which regulated home-grown hooch) if you like; those are frequently used by pro-health reform sites like the one you linked to to try to justify this via commerce clause. Your link says ‘mandate’ is simply a stronger form of regulation. I couldn’t disagree more. We’ll see what the court says I suppose. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-would-you-support-an-abortion-ban-in-exchange-for-a-uhc-bill-and-immigration-reform/533276/112 "2010-03-22T15:59:58Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Preexisting conditions does not mean preexisting bills. Well, duh. I’d buy coverage before I started racking up the bills. Rocket science this is not. ---
**Author:** ![Mr\_Smashy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/2bfe46/32.png) [@Mr\_Smashy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr_Smashy)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-would-you-support-an-abortion-ban-in-exchange-for-a-uhc-bill-and-immigration-reform/533276/113 "2010-03-22T16:01:45Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Commerce clause. This is a non-starter, but the impotent threats of the right are very entertaining. Well, I’m not the right, and this ain’t the pit. So let’s just say, read my response to **RNATB** and educate thyself. (I suppose we could go there to bump the ‘Dio got owned’ thread about your Nostrodomus-like accuracy about Mass elections, but I’d prefer to look forward, not back.) ---
**Author:** ![Mr\_Smashy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/2bfe46/32.png) [@Mr\_Smashy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr_Smashy)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-would-you-support-an-abortion-ban-in-exchange-for-a-uhc-bill-and-immigration-reform/533276/114 "2010-03-22T16:04:59Z")
> [@BrightNShiny](#): > > Here ya go: Right. If it were a tax. But it’s not. It’s a mandate to enter into a contract with a private party. There’s a big difference. Frankly, if Obama had decided to fund this through a tax increase, the honest way (instead of keeping it off the books), I’d probably be in favor of it. But as it stands now, it is a) unconstitutional, b) will hammer our deficit since there’s no way Congress will take $500b out of Medicare and $200b out of DocFix, and c) will create unintended consequences that will suck (the free-rider situation talked about before, plus docs retiring reducing avail of healthcare, etc) ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-would-you-support-an-abortion-ban-in-exchange-for-a-uhc-bill-and-immigration-reform/533276/115 "2010-03-22T16:09:09Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > Right. If it were a tax. But it’s not. > > It’s a mandate to enter into a contract with a private party. There’s a big difference. Nope. You get a choice. Either enter into the contract OR pay an extra tax. The income tax code does this type of thing all over the place. If I don’t get a mortgage, I pay extra taxes. If I don’t donate to charity, I pay extra taxes. There’s no difference between that and what is happening with the health care bill. And this has already been covered in this thread. ---
**Author:** ![Anaamika](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Anaamika](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Anaamika)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-would-you-support-an-abortion-ban-in-exchange-for-a-uhc-bill-and-immigration-reform/533276/116 "2010-03-22T16:16:10Z")
I will only say this: Curtis LeMay, you are dreadfully naive if you think outlawing abortion is going to curtail abortions in anyway. I’ve said it before and I’ve said it again. People want there to be less abortions? Education, easy access to birth control, less stigma for using birth control. That is the ONLY way you are going to get less abortions and it won’t happen for a couple of generations. We have to think long term. ---
**Author:** ![Zsofia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/7bcc69/32.png) [@Zsofia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zsofia)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-would-you-support-an-abortion-ban-in-exchange-for-a-uhc-bill-and-immigration-reform/533276/117 "2010-03-22T16:16:46Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > Well, duh. > I’d buy coverage before I started racking up the bills. Rocket science this is not. Oh, I’m sure it’s like flood insurance, which doesn’t go into effect for 30 days or so. In other words, you can’t buy flood insurance when the hurricane is charging up the coast at you. ---
**Author:** ![kingbighair](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/13edae/32.png) [@kingbighair](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kingbighair)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-would-you-support-an-abortion-ban-in-exchange-for-a-uhc-bill-and-immigration-reform/533276/118 "2010-03-22T16:28:58Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > Right. If it were a tax. But it’s not. > > It’s a mandate to enter into a contract with a private party. There’s a big difference. > > Frankly, if Obama had decided to fund this through a tax increase, the honest way (instead of keeping it off the books), I’d probably be in favor of it. But as it stands now, it is a) unconstitutional, b) will hammer our deficit since there’s no way Congress will take $500b out of Medicare and $200b out of DocFix, and c) will create unintended consequences that will suck (the free-rider situation talked about before, plus docs retiring reducing avail of healthcare, etc) What are the odds. I just started a thread [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=556773) about this. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-would-you-support-an-abortion-ban-in-exchange-for-a-uhc-bill-and-immigration-reform/533276/119 "2010-03-22T16:30:52Z")
> [@Zsofia](#): > > Oh, I’m sure it’s like flood insurance, which doesn’t go into effect for 30 days or so. In other words, you can’t buy flood insurance when the hurricane is charging up the coast at you. Are you sure? What does the letter of the bill say? Even assuming you are right, say I am diagnosed with cancer. I can now go (even though I haven’t paid anything in for the last 12 yrs) go get covered, wait 30 days and then rack up a huge bill. This will end up right where the democrats want it to end up. The end of private insurance companies. I haven’t figured out if that is a good thing or not. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2010, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-would-you-support-an-abortion-ban-in-exchange-for-a-uhc-bill-and-immigration-reform/533276/120 "2010-03-22T16:35:24Z")
> [@Mr\_Smashy](#): > > Well, I’m not the right, and this ain’t the pit. So let’s just say, read my response to **RNATB** and educate thyself. Your response is uneducated and incorrect. That’s what happens when you get all your information from Sean Hannity. The federal government’s right to do this has already been adjudicated. The state “laws” and threatened lawsuits being proffered by pandering politicians in redneck states are just so much empty theater and grandstanding symbolism. You’re welcome to believe it course, just like you’re welcome to believe in elves, but these lawsuits will go nowhere, the state laws will mean nothing, and people who can afford health insurance but don’t buy will pay their penalties. _Tetelestai_, bro. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-would-you-support-an-abortion-ban-in-exchange-for-a-uhc-bill-and-immigration-reform/533276.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberals-would-you-support-an-abortion-ban-in-exchange-for-a-uhc-bill-and-immigration-reform/533276.md?page=7)