…Pro-life victory? Not quite.

Health Care Overhaul

The Stupak-Pitts amendment to H.R. 3962 (which prevents federal funding of abortion) was passed last night in the House.


H.R. 3962 was passed by a vote of 220 to 215.

Not so great!

Here’s why:

While I celebrate the inclusion of a pro-life amendment in the bill, pro-lifers should still have serious concerns with H.R. 3962.

The bill does not:

1. give any clear provisions for conscience protection of health care workers

2. exclude the controversial “death panels” on end-of-life care.

Furthermore, H.R. 3962 must now go to the Senate to be passed. From there the bill will go to conference where a final version will be created. There are no guarantees that language from the Stupak-Pitts amendment would be preserved in the final version.

FINAL POINT: H. R. 3962 has multiple problems, only one of which is addressed by the Stupak-Pitts amendment, and even the fate of that amendment is not assured once the bill passes to the Senate.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to …Pro-life victory? Not quite.

  1. Brad says:

    There are no provisions for ‘death panels’ in the health care bill. If there were, I’d be equally unhappy with it.

  2. Jordan says:

    I’m guessing what she is talking about is the mandatory end of life sessions that seniors must attend every 5 years. Having granparents sometimes struggle with whether they should continue taking medication and to stay alive I have a real objection to them being forced to meet with a government employee to talk about end of life options including weening off medication. If it was optional that would be one thing but mandatory is very troubling and can lea down a very slippery an steep slope when this plan costs more than it is currently claimed to cost.
    Also, Gina may be talking about the fact that a section of the bill does place someone in charge of doing studies on ho car can best be rationed. I wouln’t call that a death panel but that section does catch my attention especially after the role the government had in deciding which car dealerships were to be closed.

  3. Brad says:

    Unless the bill underwent some last-minute changes or the Associated Press has their facts wrong, the counseling is not mandatory. More here:


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s