Anything less then the long standing and well tested Hyde Amendment would be less then current law when it comes to tax payer funding of abortion and should draw legitimate concern as pro-life democrats are being tempted to vote less then Hyde. It makes no sense to not have the Hyde Amendment language in this bill unless one is trying to get abortion covered some way via American tax payers and/or one is trying to compromise with something less than current law to get health care reform passed and I am sure there are other possibilities. But regardless current law is the Hyde Amendment on tax payer funding of abortion so they need to put current law in the bill or else it will be seen as a compromised position that doesn't protect tax payer funding of abortions like current law would.
For more on this watch excellent interview of pro-life democrat Stupak who has not yet compromised with the Hyde Amendment language in the bill in video below and as you watch read about the most recent compromise from JillStanek.com...
Jill Stanek reports on the latest possible compromise as another attempt to not have to place the Hyde Amendment language into the bill.
Breaking News: New phony healthcare amendment may peel House pro-life Dems
A Congress Daily article this morning (subscription only) entitled, "House Dems close to abortion deal," begins:
Democrats are close to finalizing an abortion compromise that would hopefully draw enough moderate anti-abortion Democrats to mitigate a threat from Rep. Bart Stupak, D-MI, to block the bill from coming to the floor....
Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-CT, has been working on the abortion compromise with Rep. Brad Ellsworth, D-IN. At a Caucus meeting Monday night, Ellsworth circulated revised language to strengthen the outline drafted by Rep. Lois Capps, D-CA, without writing into law the Hyde Amendment's prohibition on using federal funds for abortion. Rep. Baron Hill, D-IN, said the language assuaged his concerns about abortion in the bill. "It makes it clear that no federal dollars can be used for abortion," Hill said....
THIS IS A PHONY.
First hint: DeLauro is a flaming pro-abort.
The National Right to Life Committee has obtained the text of what it believes to be the Ellsworth Amendment, and the changes it makes in the abortion-related provisions of the bill are strictly cosmetic.
According to the NRLC, If that language is added to HR 3962:
(1) the new federal government insurance program, the "public option," would still be explicitly authorized to pay for all elective abortions by language on page 110 of the bill; and
(2) the federal premium subsidies ("affordability credits") could still be used to purchase private health plans that cover elective abortion.
Per NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson: "The pro-abortion House Democratic leadership is using Ellworth's phony language to undercut the real pro-life amendment, which is the amendment proposed by Reps. Bart Stupak and Joe Pitts (R-PA). The Ellsworth language is the legislative equivalent of putting pancake makeup on a cancer, rather than performing lifesaving surgery."
Action: Until now Ellsworth was had a good pro-life record. Call his DC office to convey dismay (202-225-4636) as well as his Evansville (812- 465-6484) and Terre Haute offices (812- 232-0523).
Most importantly, encourage pro-lifers in IN's 8th Congressional District to do the same.
Also call your congressperson and tell him or her pro-lifers will accept nothing less than adoption of the Stupak-Pitts Amendment.
