Showing posts with label Abortion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Abortion. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 25, 2009

Members of Congress who voted for the Stupak ban are expressing “buyer’s remorse”

Members of Congress have been saying in public interviews that they didn’t realize the impact of Stupak's amendment before they voted for this proposal. Now that they have come to fully appreciate the impact of the Stupak ban they're rethinking their positions. Like President Obama, members of the House are indicating that the Stupak amendment went too far.

The Stupak ban would prohibit any coverage of abortion in the new "exchange," or marketplace, established by health reform. This ban would apply to both the proposed public option and to private plans.

Currently, a majority of private health insurance plans cover abortion care - even the one offered to employees of the Republican National Committee. But if your employer obtains your insurance in the future through the new exchange you will lose that coverage.

There is an alternative.

The Capps compromise, worked out by both pro-choice and anti-choice members of Congress, ensures that no federal funding would be used to pay for abortions while also ensuring that women do not lose the benefits they currently have. Under Capps, no federal funds would be used for abortion. The funds would be segregated from private dollars.





Thomas Hayes
is an entrepreneur, journalist, and political analyst who contributes regularly to a host of web sites on topics ranging from economics and politics to culture and community.

Tuesday, August 04, 2009

Tom Hayes - Let's talk about euthanasia and abortion

Abortion is a proven "wedge" issue, in the finest tradition of Karl Rove's masterful divisive politics, and it's arguably being used that way again right now in the health-care insurance reform debate. The mainstream media is commercial, so they're far from immune from the effects of the money being spent to spin, shape, frame, and control this debate.

Most of us, frankly, have "good enough" insurance, and we all get to make the choice to keep our current system. In fact, of the 5 out of 6 covered Americans, fully 3 out of 4 of them say they're mostly satisfied. So let's be clear: this isn't about the majority, this is about the 1 in 6 Americans who aren't covered. 1 in 6 - that's not quite 50 million Americans.

Now, nobody's proposed socialized medicine - if they had the doctors wouldn't be mostly in favor of reform. But it's a tested sound bite that shaves off a few votes. Did you know they need more billing clerks at Duke Medical Center than they have nurses? Does that get through to the opponents of reform at all? No, apparently they're happier with it spun by lobbyists and CEOs than sticking with reality.

They dragged in euthanasia (which then echoed through the media) because "socialized medicine" didn't make as big a dent as they had hoped. So, too, with abortion. It's being dragged into the debate for the express purpose of derailing the whole package - undermining an honest debate about our values, and shaving off a few votes here and there. It's classic Rove/GOP/special interest "divide and conquer" in the face of Obama's attempts to make real improvements.

They hope we'll ignore that the leading cause of personal bankruptcy filings is medical expenses. Never mind that the number of uninsured Americans grows by over 10,000 people each and every day. No, no, don't fret about your neighbors who aren't as well off as you, that's not your problem - just keeping listening to the $pecial interests as they spend millions of dollars per day, raised by bureaucrats at companies who decide your premiums and what they'll cover or not cover, all to influence congress and public opinion. The bureaucrats who control our access to health care right now live rich, lavish lifestyles with no incentive to change the system, let alone to cover those who need it most.

More than half of personal bankruptcy filings are triggered by medical costs. Really.

Do you think this is about somebody else? Do you think everybody you know is really covered? Do you mind that most of the raises in the last three decades for low and middle-income earners have gone right into the pockets of health insurance profiteers, because premiums have been rising at triple the rate of inflation?

Lots of special interest money is being thrown at this debate, and it's up to us to keep the truth out there, because when people hear things like abortion, socialized medicine, or alleged euthanasia for senior citizens, many have a visceral reaction and stop thinking, let alone listening. Obviously, profits are at stake or the insurance companies wouldn't be spending all that money that might otherwise be going to control costs.

Are you still thinking?

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

An Evangelical Christian Argument for Obama

Evangelicals have taken a beating this election cycle, but not all of us support McCain/Palin and refusing to support the GOP does not mean evangelicals are abandoning their principles. Here are some excerpts from my stinging critique of the GOP and my argument for why Christians can support Obama:

I am an evangelical Christian with a record of voting in line with the Republican Party. This year, however, I am casting my vote for Barack Obama. My support for Obama stands on its own, and has been well documented throughout this blog. But why would an evangelical Christian vote for a Democrat? The answer is as much a reflection of what Obama stands for as it is what the GOP does not.

Last week I received an email from Dr. James Dobson – whose internet ministry I subscribe to – imploring me to “vote my values,” meaning to vote for the candidate whose “pro-life” and pro traditional marriage rhetoric carried Dr. Dobson’s stamp of approval. My immediate thought was: Why should I vote two of my values to the exclusion of all others? In that question lies the problem of the Christian allegiance to the Republican Party...

GOP leadership has (perhaps with the willing participation of some Christian leaders) twisted and distilled our values to the point where we are just hot-button sound bites wrapped up in a platform designed to benefit the wealthy and corporate classes. In the process, they have turned uninformed Christians (me among them) into “single-issue voters,” sheepishly towing the Party line while it exploits the name of God and bastardizes our ideals to foment hatred, division and racism and to engender animosity toward Christians by associating us with a platform that is anathema to God’s love.


The full article is here.

Rob J.

Tuesday, March 13, 2007

Presidential Candidate Rudy Giuliani's Abortion Flip-Flop

Presidential Candidate Rudy Giuliani's Abortion Flip-Flop -- all in caps -- is all over YouTube. There are two video clips that show the former New York Mayor and 9-11 hero making statements both for and against abortion. In the first one, he's running for mayor of New York City and said that he favored public funding for abortions for poor people -- an admirable stance.

Now, he states that he's against abotion. But what's more unfortunate is he stated that he never ran in support of abortion. Check them out here:

Rudy for abortion...



Rudy against abortion...



A person's entitled to change their mind, but he should be up front about why he did so.