|
 12:46 PM, Feb 7, 2012 • By JOHN MCCORMACKFormer Democratic congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper, a Catholic from Erie, Pennsylvania, cast a crucial vote in favor of Obamacare in 2010. She lost her seat that November in part because of her controversial support of Obamacare. But Dahlkemper said recently that she would have never voted for the health care bill had she known that the Department of Health and Human Services would require all private insurers, including Catholic charities and hospitals, to provide free coverage of contraception, sterilization procedures, and the "week-after" pill "ella" that can induce early abortions.
"I would have never voted for the final version of the bill if I expected the Obama Administration to force Catholic hospitals and Catholic Colleges and Universities to pay for contraception,” Dahlkemper said in a press release sent out by Democrats for Life in November. "We worked hard to prevent abortion funding in health care and to include clear conscience protections for those with moral objections to abortion and contraceptive devices that cause abortion. I trust that the President will honor the commitment he made to those of us who supported final passage."
Of course, most abortion opponents disagree with Dahlkemper that the HHS regulation is Obamacare's only moral problem. Under Obamacare, each state's federally subsidized health care exchange is required to offer a health insurance plan that covers elective abortions unless the state passes a law opting out of the requirement.
As former Democratic congressman Bart Stupak said when the Senate passed Obamacare in December of 2009, "A review of the Senate language indicates a dramatic shift in federal policy that would allow the federal government to subsidize insurance policies with abortion coverage. Further, the segregation of funds to pay for abortion is another departure from current policy prohibiting federal subsidy of abortion coverage."
Stupak, Dahlkemper, and a handful of other Democrats who held back on voting for final passage of Obamacare eventually voted for the exact same language in the Senate bill because the president signed an executive order saying the law wouldn't fund abortions.
But the executive order signed by President Obama did nothing to prevent the subsidized health care exchanges from covering elective abortions.
8:59 PM, Oct 14, 2010 • By JOHN MCCORMACKNational Democrats have given up on Ohio Representative Steve Driehaus's reelection campaign, but the race took an interesting turn today when the Ohio Elections Commission agreed to allow Driehaus's case against a pro-life group, the Susan B. Anthony List, to proceed.
Read more... Death panels, again.1:29 PM, Oct 6, 2010 • By JOHN MCCORMACKCQ's Tricia Miller reports on the latest dust-up in the bitter race to replace Bart Stupak:
The National Republican Congressional Committee is circulating a video of state Rep. Gary McDowell, the Democratic nominee in the race to replace retiring Michigan Rep. Bart Stupak (D), showing McDowell discussing the cost of health care in the last three months of life. The event took place at Mancelona High School in the fall of 2009, months before McDowell declared he would run for Congress.
Read more... A muddled clarification.1:57 PM, Jul 15, 2010 • By JOHN MCCORMACKDouglas Johnson of the National Right to Life Committee explains that the Pennsylvania high-risk insurance pool--funded entirely by the federal government--will provide coverage for elective abortions:
Read more... 6:45 PM, Apr 7, 2010 • By JOHN MCCORMACKThe pro-life Susan B. Anthony List has launched a $150,000 radio and phone campaign targeting Bart Stupak and four other other self-proclaimed pro-life Democrats who voted for the abortion-funding health care bill.
You can listen to the ad here. Transcript:
“It was the ultimate betrayal.
“Congressman Bark Stupak told us he was pro-life. Stupak promised us he would protect the unborn. That he would stand firm…and lead the coalition to keep abortion funding out of the health care bill.
“But Bart Stupak betrayed us…and voted to spend federal dollars – our dollars - on abortions. He should be ashamed.
“…Tell Bart Stupak we will not forget.”
The pro-life campaign against the Stupak Democrats comes as reports emerge that Stupak is considering retirement, and a Tea Party group cuts its own ad targeting Stupak.
Read more... 4:12 PM, Apr 2, 2010 • By JOHN MCCORMACKThe Hill reports:
Lawmakers living at the C Street House are violating congressional gift rules, a watchdog charged Thursday.
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) filed a complaint Thursday with the Senate Ethics Committee and the House Office of Congressional Ethics, charging members residing at C Street with paying below-market rent.
The complaint lists Sens. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) and John Ensign (R-Nev.) as well as Reps. Mike Doyle (D-Pa.), Heath Shuler (D-N.C.), Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) and Zach Wamp (R-Tenn.) as allegedly receiving improper housing benefits.
Read more... 4:20 PM, Mar 31, 2010 • By JOHN MCCORMACK
There's nothing Obamacare opponents would love more than to beat Bart Stupak after he agreed in the 11th hour to deliver the crucial votes for a health care bill that didn't include his amendment to prevent taxpayer-funding of abortion. Dan Benishek, a general surgeon for 27 years in Northern Michigan, hopes to be the one to do the deed. A newcomer to politics, Benishek didn't even have a website set up when Stupak announced he would vote for the health care bill. Since then Benishek has quickly capitalized on what many believe to be Stupak's betrayal and is well on his way to raising $219,000 online at www.dropstupak.com.
Money will help, but Benishek certainly has his work cut out for him. Obama narrowly won the district 50% to 48% in 2008, but Stupak cruised to reelection in 2008 by 22 points (65% to 33%). He survived his first reelection campaign back in the 1994 Republican Revolution by taking 57% of the vote--even after he voted for the unpopular Clinton budget.
Read more... 4:59 PM, Mar 24, 2010 • By JOHN MCCORMACKCBS reports:
The calls placed to Stupak's office reveal the extreme anger members of Congress are facing.
"Congressman Stupak, you baby-killing mother f***er... I hope you bleed out your a**, got cancer and die, you mother f***er," one man says in a message to Stupak.
Read more...  2:35 PM, Mar 24, 2010 • By JOHN MCCORMACKFrom the American Principles Project:
When Bart Stupak announced his support for the Senate Health Care Reform Bill, one reporter asked him if the deal between Barack Obama and the pro-life Democrats was made face-to-face with the President himself. Mr. Stupak said that he had made the deal working with White House Counsel Robert Bauer.
Who is this Robert Bauer - the man capable of selling Bart Stupak a bill of goods on the Executive Order?
Prior to his involvement with Mr. Obama, from 2005-2007 Mr. Bauer was a registered lobbyist for America Votes. In this capacity, he sought to enact laws that would help the fund-raising prospects of left-leaning 527s. After he finished the campaign of Mr. Obama, he served as the Counsel for the pro-choice election powerhouse EMILY's List.
America Votes (AV) is a coalition of liberal groups that has, according to their website "more than 20,000,000 Americans in every state in the country." AV is controlled by an Executive Board that consists of 9 members: 5 unions (AFL-CIO, AFSCME, NEA, SEIU, and UFCW), 2 global warming advocacy groups (The Sierra Club and the League of Conservation Voters), 1 general liberal advocacy network (Progressive Future), and, most importantly, the most influential pro-choice lobby - The Planned Parenthood Action Fund.
Of course, this doesn't prove that Stupak's deal is meaningless--we have to rely on logic and the law to prove that. But it is fitting that Stupak sold out for a deal with a lawyer who has worked for the abortion lobby. As Planned Parenthood's president said, the executive order is nothing more than a "symbolic gesture."
Read more... It was all just hot air. 1:27 PM, Mar 22, 2010 • By JOHN MCCORMACKEveryone, and I mean everyone, agrees that the executive order on abortion Bart Stupak got President Obama to sign is a sham--a fig leaf not worth the paper it's printed on.
So why did Stupak sell out his pro-life principles?
Read more... Dissent from the Left. 12:10 PM, Mar 22, 2010 • By JEFFREY H. ANDERSON
John McCormack writes that Rep. Bart Stupak's inexplicable an unprincipled late cave-in on taxpayer-funded abortion -- so senseless and bizarre after he held out so nobly for so long -- represents "an odd moment of agreement in a debate over health care that's been filled with factual disputes," as all sides agree that Stupak's late deal with President Obama for an executive order does nothing to change the legislation and will be essentially useless in practice. But that's not the only point of agreement about the outcome of the vote. In eschewing the normal legislative process of collaboration and compromise -- not to mention the notion of incremental change -- and instead insisting on a one-party comprehensive bill and a rush to the finish line at all costs, President Obama has managed to craft a bill that essentially no one likes.
Read more... 11:35 PM, Mar 21, 2010 • By JOHN MCCORMACKBart Stupak said at his press conference this afternoon that an executive order signed by President Obama will accomplish what his amendment would have accomplished:
"All the safeguards we were looking for, the principle we fought for all these months, will be enforced through this exeuctive order. ... It's a good agreement."
Stupak said on Fox News this afternoon that the executive order will have "the full force and effect of law."
The problem with Stupak's statements is that they're not true--and no one on the right or the left believes them to be true, except for Bart Stupak and a few of his friends.
Read more... Two votes planned on reconciliation bill and Senate bill.3:30 PM, Mar 20, 2010 • By MARY KATHARINE HAMI just got back from a Tea Party protest and an anti-war protest (And, they think the righties are the unreasonable ones???), so I'm catching up on healthcare news.
The latest is that the House will push ahead with two real votes— one on reconciliation and one on the Senate bill. They're likely to vote on the reconciliation bill first, and there is reportedly a letter from more than 50 senators promising to vote for the House reconciliation bill. Steny Hoyer said the Senate bill, once voted on by the House will go directly to the president for his signature.
Read more...
|
- Conservative Intelligence
- Satirical Wit
- Foreign Policy Insight
- Sophisticated Perspective
Ethan Epstien, in a New York System state of mind
Read more...
-
-
Washington plays by TSA rules.
-
Reflections from the thinking man’s knuckleballer.
-
Really?
-
A film without pretension about warriors as heroes.
-
With American evangelicals on the ground in South Sudan.
-
-
Romney’s challenge is to address the deep uneasiness in America and point the way to a comeback.
-
The American and his/her car.
-
   Obama’s overblown tax breaks
for business.
 Why we need to break up the banks.
 Why we build memorials.
|