November 19, 2009
Posted: November 19th, 2009 06:24 PM ET

Washington (CNN) - Abortion rights opponents made clear Thursday that they are adamantly against language regarding coverage for reproductive services in Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's health care bill.

"Senator Reid's bill provides for an unprecedented expansion of federally funded abortion," said Charmaine Yoest, head of the group Americans United for Life. "The majority of Americans who oppose federal funding of abortion will not stand for policies that force them into paying for abortions under the guise of health care reform."

The Senate plan would allow abortion coverage through privately funded premiums in both a government-run public insurance option and private plans purchased with the assistance of government subsidies.

The more conservative House of Representatives plan, in contrast, would bar abortion coverage under both the public option and private policies purchased with government subsidies. House Democratic leaders opposed the measure, but added it to win critical support from anti-abortion members.


Both plans would allow for exceptions in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the mother is in danger.

Abortion opponents have rallied around the House language. Democratic Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan, co-author of the language adopted by the House, claimed Thursday that the Senate measure would "mandate abortion coverage for the first time in history."

GOP Sen. Mike Johanns of Nebraska said the abortion language in the Senate bill "satisfies no one." He also said a Senate vote on whether to open floor debate on the bill - now slated for Saturday - will be a "key vote for the pro-life community."

The leaders of the 40-member Republican Senate caucus have vowed to try to block the bill, requiring Reid to round up 60 votes in the 100 member chamber to overcome a filibuster and launch debate.

"We don't need 40 Democrats to stand up," Johanns said. "We just need one."

Democratic leaders have been walking a political tightrope on the abortion issue in recent weeks. Abortion opponents warn they have the votes to oppose a bill if necessary; abortion rights supporters were infuriated by what they saw as a sellout of core Democratic Party principles in the House.

"Health care reform must not be misused as an opportunity to restrict women's access to reproductive health services," 90 House Democrats opposed to the amended abortion language wrote in a letter to President Barack Obama last week.

In an example of the complicated politics of the issue, all but one of the House Democrats who signed the letter had voted to pass the overall health care bill even though it contained the amendment they opposed.

Their strategy now is to work with Obama and Senate Democrats to prevent inclusion of the language of the House amendment in a final health care bill.

Filed under: Abortion • Health care • Senate


Joyce in South Carolina   November 19th, 2009 11:13 pm ET

What part of "Abortion is legal" don't you understand.

Nobody is going to force anyone to have an abortion. This is a personal decision made by the woman.................and should be covered by insurance.

Jim   November 19th, 2009 11:08 pm ET

I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I don't think the government should pay for something that is as controversial as abortion insurance, but that would mean that the government shouldn't pay for wars either because there are so many people who see them as morally wrong. The government couldn't function if it couldn't pay for anything that someone found obnoxious.

Republicans are the American Taliban   November 19th, 2009 11:06 pm ET

Where was the rage when the Republicans had it in their insurance plans? The same group is enraged that the world is round...

Ken in NC   November 19th, 2009 11:01 pm ET

WOW Abortion right supporters need to go someplace and find something to do other than trying to kill healthcare. This is a Health Care Bill and not an Abortion Bill. As for the Catholic church pulling out of Washington, DC if it passes a Same Sex Marriage bill, you are not the only church GOD has in HIS fold.

liz   November 19th, 2009 10:55 pm ET

I'll bet these anti-choice people are all perfectly ok with our tax dollars going to pay for an illegal, unnecessary war in which tens of thousands of real people have died. The height of their hypocrisy never ceases to amaze me. These are the same people who want to do away with head start and other programs that benefit kids. 'Life is sacred, then you're born.' I hope the health care bill actually covers all health care, not just what the crazies consider health care.

thinkerone   November 19th, 2009 10:47 pm ET

Pro-life supporters are referred to in the headline of this CNN article as "Abortion Rights Opponents". The language itself is biased so that readers immediately think of these individuals in a negative light. Anyone who's an opponent of "rights" has to be bad, right? Hey, CNN, how about using unbiased terminology. Even "abortion opponents" is better than "abortion RIGHTS opponents".
Headline should begin "Abortion Opponents ..... "

Leonard Fitts   November 19th, 2009 10:32 pm ET

These people are incredible hypocrites..they argue all day long that they don't want to get between a patient and their doctor UNTIL a woman wants to control her own body..then all bets are off. Are they that stupid or that hypocritical..and which is worse??

phoenix86   November 19th, 2009 10:29 pm ET

Pelosi and Obama are practically abortionists. Shamefull.

S.B.   November 19th, 2009 10:19 pm ET

What ever happened to the idea of letting women make their own decisions when it comes to abortion? If people don't believe in abortions, they don't have to have one, but why should they be able to foist their will on everyone else. Most of these people so opposed to abortion rights are men. There are so many intolerant people in this country that it makes me sick!

Donald   November 19th, 2009 10:17 pm ET

Abortion is the murder of the unborn. However that is between that expecting mother and God. That being said, tax payers money should not be use to subsidize a person's act of murdering the unborn. If a woman so desire to get rid of that fetus (baby in the womb) she should use her own money apart from the taxes that we all pay. I don't want my tax dollars to to use to pay for murder.

Wanda, DC   November 19th, 2009 10:03 pm ET

How about we just stay out of decisions between the doctor and patient in all instances period. I won't take away your choice to take Viagra and you don't take away my choice to decide what to do with my private parts.

Party Purity will never bring Political Power!   November 19th, 2009 10:03 pm ET

That is about right, anti-choice "christians" willing to throw all the uninsured children living in poverty to the lions, as long as they can save a zygote which may be brought into this world and die due to lack of good prenatal care and no "well baby" health insurance.

Again, this heathen is confused by your "living like Christ" examples!

mrs b   November 19th, 2009 10:00 pm ET

I would like to think that safe and legal abortion will be covered in the final bill. I would also like to think that all senators and congressional representatives will realize that women's reproductive health is part of the larger health care debate. I urge my Senators from TN to cross party lines and do the right thing for women.

load3d   November 19th, 2009 9:58 pm ET

ok so add another line to my 1040 asking if I support abortion rights or not, and I'll pay my share of the gov't subsidized tax.

mabel floyd   November 19th, 2009 9:48 pm ET

i am sick of these bossy people who say that they will not be deterred when it comes to paying for abortion or anything else they disagree with--however i disagreed with the war with iraq–does not matter my money is being used to kill in a war begun to assuage the ego of a man who stole the presidency.
the very people who decry government intervention into the lies of americans–are the very people who want the law to make sure they are in charge in every bedroom in the usa. they want to be sure every one has to adhere to their view of the beginnings of life and also when the end of life is at had.
what a disgusting bunch of people.-don't want an abortion? DO NOT HAVE ONE!!!!

J.C. - Independent 4 Public Option   November 19th, 2009 9:47 pm ET

"Abortion opponents warn they have the votes to oppose a bill if necessary;"

You cannot be against abortion and health reform bill simultaneously. What is the difference in supporting abortions and denying people of health care coverage? They both kill people, young or older. Abortion opponents are not any better.

James, Ho. TX   November 19th, 2009 9:23 pm ET

The G.O.P. is against a "Mother's Right To Choose" mainly because it needs for these children to grow and be raised until they're 18 yrs .of age and then its off to some "WAR" to the likes of G.W. and his Cronies. Has nothing to do with Health Care reforms.

garer   November 19th, 2009 9:21 pm ET

Look I think that if half the country disagrees with abortion and half agree....the fair compromise is it is legal but no tax dollar can be used to support it. That seems reasonable and logical.

ib   November 19th, 2009 9:18 pm ET

NO WAY SHOULD WE HAVE TO PAY FOR SOMETHING WE DON'T BELIEVE IN WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS. Unless a woman's health or it's a case of incest or rape I think murder of unborn children is the best way to describe aboration. This whole bill should be DOA; it costs to much and forces something on the majority that we don't want. Vote them out in 2010.

Old Farmboy   November 19th, 2009 8:55 pm ET

The argument of abortion is defined in Roe vs Wade. That's not what is being argued here. The argument is who should pay. Personally, I feel that if someone gets pregnant by rape or incest, they should have the right to a government funded abortion. I do not think that if someone is sexually active that they automatically have that right to a government paid abortion. I ask a question to the people, why should you pay for the abortion of someone that you have never, or never will meet? The hoopla of not costing taxpayer dollars, to me is a myth. How is more debt going to create less debt?

Dog Bite It   November 19th, 2009 8:47 pm ET

What should be done about killing the defenseless unborn babies is a no brainer.
Makes more sense to get the fireing squad out for members in the halls of congress that are 75 plus years old and can't get out of the way?

Keith in Austin   November 19th, 2009 8:46 pm ET

Taxpayer dollars going toward Abortions. Brilliant! I hope all God-fearing Americans stand up in unison and protest this catastrophe.

Donna from Colorado Springs   November 19th, 2009 8:45 pm ET

These people REALLY need to get a life!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The healthcare bill as proposed does not include coverage for abortions. I don't know who these people are listening to, but I'm pretty sure they are from the right side of the aisle!

Dom Mazzoccoli   November 19th, 2009 8:39 pm ET

US Senators that agreed to pay off Sen. Landrieu should be arrested for vote buying and bribery and Sen. Landrieu for blackmail in the $100million deal to get her to vote for the healthcare bill. This group is as corrupt as ever and now not only do we all have to pay for the healthcare boondoggle that we now have to pay for this bribe with our tax dollars.

No Hillary = No Obama   November 19th, 2009 8:37 pm ET

In this day and age unless a woman is raped or finds out they will have a developmentally impaired child whom they feel they cannot care for in good conscious – why would you act so irresponsibily as to place yourself in a situation where you have to get an abortion?

Flex   November 19th, 2009 8:31 pm ET

Can we exclude health care for religious organizations? I can't think of a more apt way of showing what we think of the bible thumping lunatics!

Ted from Calif.   November 19th, 2009 8:30 pm ET

I am not a big fan of abortion but I am a lesser fan of the religious right's efforts to force their religious beliefs on others. They forget the part of the First Amendment that protects citizens from religion.

Helene   November 19th, 2009 8:24 pm ET

Abortion is LEGAL. If you don't like abortions, don't get one.

Joe   November 19th, 2009 8:23 pm ET

When are these people going to get it. Abortin is not health care or reproductive health care. In spite of the liberal view that a woman has a right to their body< which I will not disagree with, they do not have the right to go out have sex, get pregnant and then have an abortion. The problem with this oucntry is the casualness of sex for the animalistic pleasure it provides. In those cases there is not love, just unadulterated pleasure with no concern for the chance to get pregnant. Then they just murder the fetus. YES IT IS MURDER. When someone kilsss a pregnant woman, they are tried on two counts of murder. One of you liberals please explain to me and the rest of us why is it two counts of murder yet abortion is not a murder?? What is the difference between the fetus that is aborted and the fetus that dies when the mother is killed??? You cannot tell me that htere is a difference and therefore abortion is murder and has no right being funded in the health bill. Wake up AMerica or we will go the way of all other powers in history. We will be destroyed from within and not from an outside enemy. Look around we are the enemy.

Debbie   November 19th, 2009 8:19 pm ET

It's pretty simple. Any representative of mine that votes to take away my rights as a female I will not vote for in re-election. For any representative to do so is their declaring a religion because science cannot prove that "life" begins at conception. Do cells grow? Yes but then so do tumor cells. The 1st amendment of the Constituion says the government cannot promote any religion. Pro-choice is not preventing any other from practicing their faith but anti-choice prevents me from practicing mine.

Brook E. Mantia   November 19th, 2009 8:16 pm ET

I am morally opposed to alot of stupid, objectionable things my tax dollars get spent on - but do I have a choice ??? What makes these people think they have a right to pick and choose? And it always makes me cringe when war-mongers & death-penalty advocates make noises about being "pro-life." Hypocrites!!!

Jim in New Mexico   November 19th, 2009 8:00 pm ET

Baby murder advocates rip Senate healthcare bill. Take responsibility for the "real choice" you made when you were careless enough to have inadequately protected sex. Don't ask the government to remove the consequence of your bad "choice."

dustin   November 19th, 2009 7:58 pm ET

If they can control where their tax dollars go to, then i don't want my tax dollars going to iraq or afghanistan unless it involves bringing troops home.

mike   November 19th, 2009 7:56 pm ET

I guess they haven't heard of the supreme court decision on abortion
talk about socialism lets mandate that all pro-life people adopt the
unwanted babies and that they will be responsible for there healthcare
for the rest of there lives

Nestor, Austin, TX   November 19th, 2009 7:53 pm ET

Abortion rights opponents???? How about infanticide opponents? People against the murder of children? Abortion "rights" is the right to murder the innocent.

Emrys   November 19th, 2009 7:52 pm ET

It's perfectly the place for such legislature. A bill designed to enhance quality of life should also include within it an attempt to protect life. It most definitively does not infringe upon women's rights, it merely tries to extend the rights of life to women who may not have received it in the first place...unborn ones (and don't forget the young men who would appreciate a few breathes of air, thank you muchly).

TD   November 19th, 2009 7:45 pm ET

If abortions are federally funded that would mean part of the money I pay to the government would fund this. I don't want That blood on my hands.
TD

JP   November 19th, 2009 7:44 pm ET

If a woman can't afford an abortion has anyone one figured out how much it costs taxpayers in welfare, healthcare, food stamps, and often times prison costs. Let all the people who are against abortion pay a surcharge on their taxes for he above services. Any bill that has no tort reform is a joke. Who is more important the tax payer or the rial lawyers.

g ontario   November 19th, 2009 7:36 pm ET

don,t think the united states will ever get along i say stop abortion and hand unwanted children over to the republicans party

S Callahan   November 19th, 2009 7:28 pm ET

I have my poster made...just need the place to meet....

I am so sick and tired of the slap in your face from politicans that KNOW they are on the way out. You have spite the face of God, the creator of all life, way too many times...his wrath is deserving on you!
Over 50% of the public has CLEARLY said NO ABORTION PAYMENTS WITH FEDERAL FUNDS, INCLUSIVE OF ANY FEDERAL MONIES SUPPORTED PRIAVATE OPTION OR PLAN....that should be large enough to read, don't you think. This is no joke on the public...people are enraged of the stupidity of our PUBLIC represenatives....GET IT RIGHT!!!

Kevin in Ohio   November 19th, 2009 7:15 pm ET

This is simple..... abortions are elective.... they should not be covered. And definitely not paid for by my tax dollars.

They call me "tater salad"   November 19th, 2009 7:12 pm ET

This Charmaine character is so far off the mark on this, it's almost kinda funny! If she actually had a clue ( which she obviously doesn't) she would know that there are already laws in place that prevent any Federal money being used to pay for abortions!......But, what do you expect a right-wing imbecile to say these days,.....something smart?!?.......Yeah!........Like thats ever gonna happen. HA!

JimCA   November 19th, 2009 7:08 pm ET

What a load. The bill expressly prohibits federal funding for abortions under three different accounting standards.

Insurance companies need to keep any premiums that would pay for abortion coverage as separate funds, and they have to prove that those premiums by themselves are sufficient to cover all abortion-related expenses.

Yet another campaign of lies from the right wing. Have they no honor?

floridian   November 19th, 2009 7:02 pm ET

Every thing in this health care bill is pointed at only one thing - Democratic re-elections in 2010 by catering to the numerous "entitled constituencies". Again, it continues to promolgate class warfare, it runs counter to the majority of Americans' wants, and it provides false costs/savings thru the use of the sleaziest of accounting techniques. Follow the votes and then vote them out of office America.

GI Joe   November 19th, 2009 7:01 pm ET

(Don't forget to donate your 10% so they can have gold plated everything).

Lynn   November 19th, 2009 6:59 pm ET

Those who oppose abortions, please sign up to adopt and raise a child the mother is unable to.

mjm   November 19th, 2009 6:58 pm ET

Nice headline....Abortion rights opponents. Not Pro Life rights? Or Right to Life? Slant left much?

40 republicans vow to block the bill because it's an $849,000,000,000 disaster waiting to happen. Abortion has nothing to do with it.

There has to be some democratic Senators smart enough to see that we can't afford this. Republicans can't stop this by themselves.

Of course, they can vote to cut off funding in 2010 when Republicans are back in power.

brian   November 19th, 2009 6:58 pm ET

If they don't want to pay for a health care bill that allows for women to make a choice, can I get a 10 to 25 percent decrease in taxes since I am gay and I don't have the same rights as other Americans?

Enough is enough, I want the same rights as everyone else!

I don't believe in war either, so can I get all my tax money back?

Gerry   November 19th, 2009 6:46 pm ET

If a woman want's an abortion that is her business, but I should not be forced to pay for the abortion. Does anyone know how many abortions a woman can have, or is as many as you want. Harry Reid is NUTS.

gary davis Harbor Oregon proud american   November 19th, 2009 6:41 pm ET

these aren't abortion opponents, they are consevative republicans . who think there rich leaders might have to caugh up some tax money on there wealth . off the backs of the bottom of the pile of wealth .. I have never been wealthy enough to be a real republican .nor has the majority of people in this country who think they are republicans . they are just pawns being used by the ultra wealthy racist republicans .. and if PALIN sells enough books she can be one of the few the smug the republican war machine.. they make me sick to my stomach and are a shame to be in the same country with . oh and the health insurance industry , it makes me laugh to think we might take away the control the insurance industry has over all of us ,and get a public option that is close to medicare or social security ..
wouldn't that be a hoot :) this country taking back control

Robin   November 19th, 2009 6:39 pm ET

You want an abortion. Fine, it is your concience and your PRIVATE decision. So don't expect for PUBLIC funds to pay for your irresponsibility.

I do agree with exceptions for incest and risk of mother's life.

LacrosseDad   November 19th, 2009 6:37 pm ET

Keep up the good work Sen. Reid, devide America for your own personal gain.

bob in LA   November 19th, 2009 6:35 pm ET

What the healthcare bill does is turn the clock back 10 years to pre-bush/ Repulbican controlled congress.
Abortion funding was done away with during the early years of the Bush administration. They replaced abortion with execution of our military personnel.
At least with abortion, the woman makes the decision about her body and she has a choice. When was the last time someone in the military had a choice to say they didn't want to go to war?

CNN afraid of a liberal post   November 19th, 2009 6:33 pm ET

I have to say this. A congress person is elected to do the will of the people. They want a health bill and they want (a majority) to have abortion options. Now a congress person does not have the right to vote against this because it is not their belief.

Since they were not elected to do what THEY want but what the PEOPLE want, then they should resign if they don't like abortion. The people in their state should confront them and say YOU LIED...

Comments have been closed for this article

subscribe RSS Icon
About The Ticker

The latest political news from CNN's Best Political Team, with campaign coverage, 24-7. Sign up for our twice daily Ticker emails. Got a news tip or feedback? For complete political coverage, bookmark CNNPolitics.com.

CNN=Politics Screensaver

CNN=Politics ScreensaverTap into the power of The Situation Room. Download this powerful new tool that keeps you posted on the latest political news from the campaign trail.
Download (4.1 MB, PC only)

twitter
@KuhnCNN: Great meeting @JackGrayCNN today and seeing @sinderbrandrcnn in NYC! AC Rock Stars! :-)
Updated: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 22:07:10 -0800
@KuhnCNN: Posted today: Clinton foreign trip first on Twitter. http://bit.ly/9Axuh9 /via @PoliticalTicker
Updated: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 20:36:14 -0800
@KuhnCNN: RT @octavianasrCNN: MUST-READ// Coaching tomorrow's world leaders, through social networking -- http://bit.ly/9tmW6x
Updated: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 20:32:51 -0800
@AWMooneyCNN: Metro finally comes and then stops at station for 20 minutes #snoverkill
Updated: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 19:46:27 -0800
@psteinhauserCNN: I just shoveled two feet of snow off the roof. That was fun!
Updated: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 18:14:34 -0800
Categories
Powered by WordPress.com VIP