|
|
||||||||
|
Capps amendment is a 'phony compromise,' Rep. Stupak says
Catholics United touts amendment as pro-life
![]() Tony Perkins / Chris Korzen
Related articles:
.- Catholics United has once again come out in defense of the health care reform bill, claiming that the recently approved Capps Amendment will prevent an abortion mandate. But that claim is being hotly contested by pro-life organizations and lawmakers who say that, in practice, abortions will be federally funded if the legislation passes in September. In a statement released on Monday, Catholics United welcomed the House Energy and Commerce Committee's decision last week to include language in proposed health care legislation “prohibiting taxpayer dollars from funding abortion services.” Catholics United was referring to an amendment put forward by Rep. Lois Capps (D-Calif.). According to Catholics United's assessment, the amendment “stipulates that abortion coverage cannot be included in a government-defined essential benefits package, that private insurers participating in the public program cannot be forced to cover abortion services and that plans cannot discriminate against health care providers who do not perform abortions.” “The inclusion of the Capps Amendment represents a positive step toward health care reform that preserves existing policies prohibiting federal funding for abortion services and ensuring conscience protections for health care providers,” said Chris Korzen, executive director of Catholics United. “While some questions do remain, we are confident that health care reform legislation, when finalized, will represent a workable common ground solution that can find broad support from across the spectrum of the abortion debate.” According to Catholics United, “despite last week's developments, the Family Research Council has refused to discontinue a misleading television advertising campaign intended to scare viewers into opposing the health reform package. Incredibly, the Family Research Council went as far as to denounce the Capps Amendment as evidence that the current legislative proposal will fund abortions.” “The Family Research Council's continued effort to distort the facts leads one to wonder whether the group's true intent is to derail health care reform. Instead of issuing misleading attacks and inciting fear, the Family Research Council would do better to support efforts aimed at implementing abortion-neutral policies in health care reform legislation.” Catholics United has committed to “build support for health care reform within faith communities” in key states throughout the August Congressional recess. But the Family Research Council insists that Korzen has either been deceived or is being deceptive. In a statement emailed to CNA, the FRC said that, contrary to what Catholics United asserts, the Capps amendment would actually “specifically include abortion in the health care legislation, solidifying the radical pro-abortion nature of this bill.” According to Family Research Council Action President Tony Perkins, “it has been clear to many that the health bills moving through Congress would fund abortion services and mandate coverage for abortion, jumping well beyond the current law which prohibits the funding or subsidizing of abortion.” “While many abortion proponents claimed we were incorrect in our conclusions, even the most strident deniers would have to agree the amendment offered by Rep. Capps puts the matter to rest. The Capps measure would include both abortion coverage and funding in the 'public option' and the private plans that would be part of the bills' 'Exchange' provision,” Perkins explained. “The current health care bill –he added- is one huge abortion edict. Adding subterfuge to subterfuge, after an amendment by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) and Rep. Joe Pitts (R-Penn.) to prevent mandatory abortion coverage in public or private plans passed in the committee, Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) called a re-vote on the amendment and Tennessee Democrat Bart Gordon switched his vote to the pro-abortion side.” Perkins stated that “even those who claim abortion is not included cannot possibly deny that abortion is explicitly in the legislation because of the Capps amendment.” “Seventy-one percent of Americans, according to recent polling data, do not want legislation to require insurers to cover abortion, putting the House legislation at complete odds with the will of those they are supposed to represent,” said Perkins. Mentioning the six Democrats who “held their ground and fought to keep the status quo by keeping government out of the abortion industry,” Perkins said that FRC Action commends them. “Americans need to hold those who want them to pay for abortion in a public plan to account,” said Perkins. FRC’s position has been supported by several congressmen, including some “Blue Dog” Democrats. In fact, Congressman Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) believes the Capps amendment is a “phony compromise,” according to his press secretary. Congressman Charlie Melancon, (D-Napoleonville,) voted against the committee's health care reform bill last Friday night, citing his concerns about its inclusion of a public option and its opening the door to public funding of abortion. “I am concerned that the public option, as designed, would unfairly undercut anything the private sector could offer,” Melancon said. “As someone who is personally pro-life and represents a deeply pro-life constituency, I am also concerned that this bill does not do enough to ensure taxpayer dollars do not fund abortion.” Congressman Joe Pitts (R-Penn.) said in a statement that the amendment “would still allow for taxpayer funding to pay for plans that cover abortion. This is a fig leaf, designed to lure votes from Members who want cover on the issue. The American people will not be fooled. We want an explicit exclusion in the bill to prevent any taxpayer funding from paying for abortions. Anything else is wrong, and contrary to overwhelming popular opinion.” Douglas Johnson of the National Right to Life Committee, also reminded voters that Lois Capps’ pro-life vote-scorecard is 0 for 74. Her amendment, he explained, would allow the "public option" to provide coverage for elective abortions and would allow federally subsidized private plans to provide abortion coverage as well. “Because money is fungible, it's difficult to say that tax dollars wouldn't fund abortions through this plan. Federal subsidies would also flow to private plans that cover elective abortions, under meaningless bookkeeping schemes -- and the amendment actually creates a federal mandate that there must be at least one private abortion plan in each premium rating areas of the health insurance exchange.” “The status quo is that nobody has federally subsidized health care that includes abortion,” Johnson reminded. Subscriber comments:
Published by: craig n
Katy, Tx 09/16/2009 04:52 PM EST
Abortion and premeditated murder are both wrong.
In America you have the RIGHT to be wrong.
You also get to CHOOSE where you spend eternity,
Denying the truth will not change it.
Published by: KimmieB
Nashville,TN,USA 08/13/2009 09:51 PM EST
Interesting dialog above. One must note that, those of us who believe that life is sacred, may do so for many reasons--religious, secular, or moral. Denigrating the belief systems of others doe not advance your own. It is settled scientific fact that "life" begins at conception; and from that point on, it seems to me there are two "citizens;" each with rights under our Constitution. However, the needs of one are totally disregarded because he or she cannot speak out. Forcing taxpayers to pay for abortion will permanently derail Obamacare. I look to see the provision struck in an effort to save the bill.
Published by: Karen Grube
San Diego, CA, United States 08/11/2009 12:18 AM EST
Plain and simple: I WILL NOT ALLOW MY TAX DOLLARS PAY FOR TAKING THE LIVES OF INNOCENT BABIES! No taxpayer-paid abortion! No mandating abortion as a part of private healthcare.
Published by: Pasha
Indianapolis, IN 08/06/2009 09:46 AM EST
So Bruce, if human life doesn't begin at fertilization, when does it begin? And please don't base your answer on any fairy tales -- observable scientific facts only please.
Published by: DLL
scituate Mass 08/05/2009 05:45 PM EST
Anyone making a comment on this website is looking for God. They may not be sure that they have all the answers. Certainly they are unsure of themselves and especially when they feel the need to blaspheme God,his Church and the faithful that choose to love and serve God. Religious beliefs are all over this website. This is because God has chosen to liberate all from sin. What encumbers people is sin. The 10 commandments is simple basic law and superior to the complex laws in any form,as devised by any other earthly government. Faith in nothing is nothing,as is one who believes in nothing,as there is nothing to give their character any definition. Jesus Christ is everything and defines character,as God is all in all. Faith defines character and in history faith has created the greatest of men and women. Abraham Lincoln,Gandhi,Einstein,John Paul 2,Pope Benedict all had great character and faith and this is just a small representation as there are many others.
Published by: BruceR
Milwaukee, Wi 08/04/2009 06:55 PM EST
Well, DLL, I seem to have tweaked your short hairs. Sorry. But understand, yours is a religious conviction to which I do not subscribe, and an attempt to restrict a non-subscriber's access to a legal procedure because it offends your delicate sensitivities is patently against the one document this republic holds sacred, the Constitution, which contains the establishment clause you deride.
You see, DLL, I am not encumbered by a belief system. There is no invisible man in my sky telling me to chew off my foreskin or flog my daughters. In fact, the one time your sky fairy's picture book explicitly mentions the beginning of life, it's referred to as 'quickening'... kicking in the womb. Not fertilization. Not even sure they know what that was back then, being just a few weeks after the universe began and all. Nevertheless, it is you who are attempting to impose religious beliefs on others. Which is kind of pathetic, since most of the world thinks you're silly. There is one glaringly obvious problem with a firmly entrenched belief in the christ fable and living in the USA: One can not be a American and a christian at the same time (or any other religion, for that matter). For nowhere in the bible does it speak of freedoms, voting, civil rights, equality, or anything else our beautiful Constitution grants us. No, it speaks of paying omage to Ceasar, bowing to the priests, and how to properly beat a slave. So pick it, dude: adopt the American way, or go all Taliban somewhere.
Published by: DLL
scituate Mass 08/04/2009 04:47 PM EST
Abortion is NOT Basic Medical Care!!!!!!!! Abortion is against The Basic Right to Live! It is not a basic medical procedure,especially as a form of birth control. Pay for your own abortion!! I don't want my medical plan to pay for the genocide of the poor unborn!!
As a taxpayer,and I pay ALL of my taxes,I don't want my taxes to pay for the out and out MURDER of some poor unborn Human Being! The real "Religious Wack",Worships Abortion and they are the ones FORCING THEIR BELIEF SYSTEMS on EVERYONE ELSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!STOP IT !!!!!!!!! I own my own land I pay taxes and so does everyone else and I will donate to help the Catholic Church pay there taxes,so big deal!!!!!!! Bruce R is a convict to his convictions! What establishment cause,who established what? The Supreme Court is not concerned about anybodies rights,they amend laws and the amended law doesn't need to have any sense of justice in it,it just suits the Establishment{Democratic Party} Agenda. Bruce R: all of us"Religious Wacks" are praying for you! And NO I'm not going to have an old Milwaukee Beer with you. Call Obama he might.
Published by: BruceR
milwaukee, WI, USA 08/03/2009 06:34 PM EST
To explicitly NOT allow a legal medical procedure to be covered by taxpayer dollars because it violates a particular religious conviction is a violation of the Establishment Cause, and the Supreme Court would have to step in.
Not all Americans are religious whacks. If you don't want an abortion don't have one, but keep your nonsense out of my and my family's medical care. My property taxes are higher so your silly church doesn't have to pay... that's already too much establishment for me. ADD A COMMENT (Your e-mail will NOT be published):
* Thanks for your comments. The number of messages that can be online is limited. Length should not exceed 1500 characters. CNA reserves the right to edit messages for content and tone. Comments and opinions expressed by users do not necessarily reflect the opinions or beliefs of CNA. CNA will not publish comments with abusive language, insults or links to other pages. ADVERTISING |
Latest news:
03:07 pm | Spouse of Costa Rican presidential candidate 'pockets' Eucharist 02:15 pm | Vatican responds to widely divergent reports on Boffo resignation 12:56 pm | Venezuelan cardinal calls for new evangelization of country's capital 11:11 am | International congress to focus on priestly identity and celibacy 07:10 am | Former Saints star says Super Bowl victory revealed a ‘team with destiny’ Related news :
Catholic congressman: I'd rather save my soul than vote for the health care bill FRC says Catholics United is ignoring facts of health care bill U.S. Bishops warn against using 'abortion rights' agenda in health care reform Pro-lifers send Congress 100,000 letters urging no abortion funding in health care bill Get CNA News on your email:
Resources
|
ADVERTISING
Place your ad here |
||||||
|
||||||||

