Roundup: Michelman and Kissling in the New York Times; Keenan Discusses Stupak on "Talk of the Nation"

Roundup: Michelman and Kissling in the New York Times; Keenan Discusses Stupak on “Talk of the Nation”

Nov 12, 2009, 1:27pm

Jodi Jacobson

Prochoice leaders Michelman, Kissling, and Keenan take the Stupak debate to the New York Times and National Public Radio

Michelman and Kissling on Stupak in the New York Times

"A grim reality sits behind the joyful press statements from
Washington Democrats," write Kate Michelman and Frances Kissling on the editorial page of today’s New York Times.

To secure passage of health care legislation in
the House, the party chose a course that risks the well-being of
millions of women for generations to come.

They are of course writing about the "deal" struck in the eleventh-hour on the Stupak-Pitts amendment which, in effect and among other things, would ban women who participate in the health insurance exchange called for in the House bill from obtaining insurance policies including coverage for abortion care, even if they pay 100 percent of the premiums. It is what many have called a "middle class abortion ban," just added on top of the indignities visited upon low-income women by the Hyde amendment.

By voting for this amendment, Michelman and Kissling state:

[T]he House
Democrats reinforced the principle that a minority view on the morality
of abortion can determine reproductive health policy for American women.

Many
House members "say the
tradeoff was necessary to advance the right to guaranteed health care.
They say they will fight another day for a woman’s right to choose."

But they can’t ignore the underlying shift that has taken place in
recent years. The Democratic majority has abandoned its platform and
subordinated women’s health to short-term political success. In doing
so, these so-called friends of women’s rights have arguably done more
to undermine reproductive rights than some of abortion’s staunchest
foes. That Senate Democrats are poised to allow similar anti-abortion
language in their bill simply underscores the degree of the damage that
has been done.

Michelman and Kissling argue that this situation was a foregone conclusion given the party’s desperation to capture "faith-based" voters, which, in translation largely means conservative Catholic and Evangelical voters, because those among us who are faith-based progressives no longer seem to count for much.

They write:

Many women — ourselves included — warned the
Democratic Party in 2004 that it was a mistake to build a Congressional
majority by recruiting and electing candidates opposed to the party’s
commitment to legal abortion and to public financing for the procedure.
Instead, the lust for power yielded to misguided, self-serving poll
analysis by operatives with no experience in the fight for these
principles. They mistakenly believed that giving leadership roles to a
small minority of anti-abortion Democrats would solve the party’s image
problems with “values voters” and answer critics who claimed Democrats
were hostile to religion.

And

Democrats were told to stop talking
about abortion as a moral and legal right and to focus instead on
comforting language about reducing the number of abortions. In this
regard, President Obama was right on message when he declared in his
health care speech
to Congress in September that “under our plan, no federal dollars will
be used to fund abortions” — as if this happened to be a good and moral
thing. (The tone of his statement made the point even more sharply than
his words.)

Democrats have taken to calling those who oppose a woman’s right to choose “pro-life” instead of the more correct term "anti-choice,’ and have invited groups like Democrats for Life to hold a press conference in Democratic Party
offices. The party has also promoted, they note, the ascendance of "“pro-life progressives” like
Sojourners, Catholics United and Catholics in Alliance for the Common
Good, organizations whose leaders have stated that abortions should be
made “more difficult to get.”"

This, then, is where we stand as
party leaders celebrate passage of the House bill. When it comes to
abortion, they seem to think all positions are of equal value so long
as the party maintains a majority. But the party will eventually reap
what it has sown. If Democrats do not commit themselves to defeating
the amendment, then they will face an uncompromising effort by
Democratic women to defeat them, regardless of the cost to the party’s
precious majority.

In the meantime, they conclude, "the victims of their folly
will be the millions of women who once could count on the Democratic
Party to protect them from those who would sacrifice their rights for
political gains."

Keenan on Talk of the Nation

In an appearance on Talk of the Nation, Nancy Keenan of NARAL Pro-Choice America underscored the same issues.

Asked about the Stupak amendment, Keenan said:

[I]t is an abortion ban. That
means that women in this country cannot buy health care insurance that
would cover abortion care with their own money – with their own money.

The interviewer, repeating a common misconception about the amendment says: "Well, wait a minute. The idea was an extension of the Hyde amendment,
which prevents the spending of federal money on abortion."

And Keenan responded:

[L]et’s keep in mind that the Hyde amendment is the
status quo, that the bill originally had language in it that prohibited
federal monies to be spent on abortion in this country. That was in the
bill. So the Stupak amendment goes far, far beyond the status quo and,
actually, is denying women, denying women to access insurance coverage
that covers abortion care with their own money in the exchange. Right
now, in America, about 80, 85 percent of private insurance companies
cover abortion care. So they would lose that if this Stupak amendment
eventually prevails.

November 12, 2009

Barbara
Anderson: How Pelosi pulled a fast one on pro-life lobby The Salem News

Ellen
Goodman: Lawmakers left with a false choice on health care The State Journal-Register

Health Care
Victory Bittersweet for Capps Santa
Barbara Independent

Clinton
spreads pro-choice message in
Catholic Philippines Catholic Culture

Christian and
pro-choice Observer Online

To mark
National Adoption Week, we
will be looking at the whole process BBC
News

Abortion curbs have
Democrats in dilemma Minneapolis Star
Tribune

Lawyers want
new location for Kan. abortion trial Belleville News Democrat

Political insider:
Group raises cash to challenge Stupak on abortion
The Detroit News

November 11, 2009

Obama To Meet
With Pro-Choice Leader Today TPM LiveWire