Thursday, December 10, 2009

A Dialogue In Two Parts

The first voice: Bart Stupak, in the New York Times:

OVER the past month there has been a great deal of discussion about the Stupak-Ellsworth-Pitts amendment in the House health care reform bill. Unfortunately, much of this discussion has been driven by misinformation about what our amendment does and does not do. I would like to set the record straight: Our amendment maintains current law, which says that there should be no federal financing for abortion

The second voice: Lois Capps responds at Rheality Check:

Reality: The Stupak-Pitts Amendment goes well beyond current law by contracting access to abortion services and is in no way the simple extension of the Hyde Amendment its proponents claim. It dramatically restricts consumers’ ability to purchase comprehensive health plans that include coverage for abortion services in the health exchange. In contrast the Capps Amendment, which was included in the original version of the House bill, continued the prohibition of federal funding of abortion services, but did so without restricting insurance coverage of this legal medical procedure when it is paid for with private funds. Reputable third parties, like a recent study from George Washington University, have found that the Stupak-Pitts Amendment would restrict coverage of abortion services even when paid for entirely with private funds.

You can continue reading the two pieces like that, paragraph by paragraph. Well worth the effort.