March 20th, 2010
08:21 PM ET
10 years ago

Pelosi: No separate abortion vote on health care

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said there would be no separate vote on restricting taxpayer funding for abortion.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said there would be no separate vote on restricting taxpayer funding for abortion.

Washington (CNN) - Just a day before the health care bill was expected to go up for a House vote, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Saturday there would
be no separate vote on restricting taxpayer funding for abortion.

"Not on abortion, not on abortion, not on public option, not on single payer, not on anything," Pelosi told CNN.

The speaker was responding to a question about a request by Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Michigan, for the House to vote on his language restricting taxpayer funding for abortion.

Stupak postponed a news conference Saturday, and did not immediately comment on the issue.

On Friday, he told CNN he was in talks with Pelosi, D-California.

"We had a good discussion with the speaker on the floor," said Stupak.

"But there was no agreement and there's no agreement until we see it in writing and we get a chance to massage it."

His call for a vote was staunchly opposed by a group of female abortion-rights Democrats who also met with Pelosi on Friday.

Reps. Lynn Woolsey, D-California, and Donna Edwards, D-Maryland, on Saturday said there would be no deal on Stupak's request, adding that they would bolt from the bill if such language were tied to it.

A senior Democratic source told CNN that party leaders are suggesting to Stupak that another option would be for the president to sign an executive order that would restate the long-standing ban on public funding for abortion.

When asked by a reporters whether such an order would mollify anti-abortion Democrats, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer responded, "I'm hopeful."

Filed under: Health care • Nancy Pelosi • Popular Posts
soundoff (115 Responses)
  1. axlsm

    A simple question;

    If this is so great and historical, why the need to bribe and break arms to barely pass it?

    March 20, 2010 03:18 pm at 3:18 pm |
  2. Annie, Atlanta

    Taxpayer funding for abortion doesn't exist because of the Hyde Amendment. What Stupak wanted to do away with coverage for abortions for any insurance company involved in the exchange. j

    I don't know if it's the Catholic Bishops pushing behind the scenes, or his affiliation with that crazy religious cult "The Family" from his years in the C Street House, or something else (I'm curious though), but as long as federal funds can't be used for abortion, making abortion once again illegal, which is what he appears to be trying to move toward, is a whole different matter.

    Good for Nancy Pelosi. This isn't about abortion. I'm sick of politicians who make everything about abortion!

    March 20, 2010 03:18 pm at 3:18 pm |
  3. Pat in IL

    They could "one issue" this thing to death. If someone doesn't want an abortion, then just don't get one. Otherwise, Roe v Wade protects the rights of those who need to get an abortion (nobody actually wants to), therefore, to specifically exclude that option from a federal program would be more than wrong. Besides, as much as Pelosi annoys (and sometimes scares) me, she is right on this one. Stupak is simply listening to the loudest of his constituency, not the majority of them. If these congressmen don't start doing their job of working for the good of the nation and do what is in the best interest of the majority, then they will all end up looking for another job very soon. No matter what the issue is, "one-issue" politicians are very dangerous and help pave the way for us to become a 3rd world nation – just look at education.

    March 20, 2010 03:19 pm at 3:19 pm |
  4. Commenter

    Good for you Nancy, enough is enough.

    March 20, 2010 03:23 pm at 3:23 pm |
  5. Kat

    Stand strong Stupak, We need someone with kahunas to help us stop this massive mistake. Start over and do it right. Don't sell your moral soul.

    March 20, 2010 03:24 pm at 3:24 pm |
  6. Bob in Pa

    No, Ms. Nancy perfers slight of hand tactics.
    She is cunning and evil !

    March 20, 2010 03:26 pm at 3:26 pm |
  7. johnrj08

    Here's what Bart "Simpson" Stupak is trying to do...

    Using Stupak's convoluted logic, anybody purchasing an insurance policy through the exchange might use the money they're saving on premiums to pay for an abortion they would not have otherwise chosen to have. His argument is that the government would be indirectly funding abortions. Therefore, according to him, no insurance that offers that coverage should be allowed to participate in the exchange.

    Because all insurance companies would want to participate in the exchange due to its huge number of potential customers, the de facto result of Stupak's amendment would be that no insurance companies would continue to offer that coverage, even to those who pay for the policy without any government subsidization.

    It's nothing more than a transparent attempt to erode Roe vs Wade and might even open the entire bill to questions about its Constitutionality.

    March 20, 2010 03:28 pm at 3:28 pm |
  8. valwayne

    Arrogance and corruption!

    March 20, 2010 03:30 pm at 3:30 pm |
  9. Anonymous

    Good Catholic that Nancy is, abortion discussions should not bother her......

    March 20, 2010 03:32 pm at 3:32 pm |
  10. GI Joe

    Stupid Stupak wants to single-handedly force women into coat-hanger abortions again. Hope he loses his job. All women vote him OUT of Michigan seat.

    March 20, 2010 03:32 pm at 3:32 pm |
  11. patriotmn

    Good Catholic that Nancy is, abortion discussions should not bother her......

    March 20, 2010 03:32 pm at 3:32 pm |
  12. gloryinHim

    Does anyone fear God anymore? We will all have to answer to God someday. God bless Stupak and all who are putting their necks out to save the lives of innocents.

    March 20, 2010 03:34 pm at 3:34 pm |
  13. Jason

    Let it go Bart Stupid.

    March 20, 2010 03:35 pm at 3:35 pm |
  14. ProfBill

    "Get thee to a nunnery," little Bart. You are't ready for prime time and probably never will be...

    March 20, 2010 03:40 pm at 3:40 pm |
  15. Brook

    Oh no, we can't allow abortion (legal right that it is), because there just aren't ENOUGH people without healthcare coverage as it is!

    March 20, 2010 03:41 pm at 3:41 pm |
  16. Paul H

    It's crazy to have abortion as a part of Health care debate! I mean Abortion in most, and I mean most cases is because the women doesn't want a baby, therefore it's being used for birth-control, making it a choice!
    "Choice" the very word used to fight the cause in the whole Abortion debate. Remember "Pro-Choice, and Pro-Life".
    Tax payers should not have to pay for someone's choice! This is beyond common sense, and it's what I think is the driving force behind the whole health care bill. Abortion is already big business in this country, and if this health care bill goes through it will be even bigger business.
    Follow the money people. Really listen to the things your Representatives are saying, or not saying. It's really sick the things they are hiding from us.

    March 20, 2010 03:42 pm at 3:42 pm |
  17. Joe

    I have mixed feelings regarding the entire health care program. But one thing is for sure Nancy Pelosi is more offensive then anyone other then Obama in this entire side show.

    March 20, 2010 03:44 pm at 3:44 pm |
  18. Tom

    Just like a stuborn politician/baby killer, they won't listen to reason.

    March 20, 2010 03:44 pm at 3:44 pm |
  19. Ken in Pisgah Forest

    Just tell Rep. Stupak that every legal mind in this country says the Hyde Amendment is still enforce in this bill. He does not need a separate vote. This bill does not allow for federal funds to pay for abortions. He is being an obstructionist. What is left of the middle class needs this bill!

    March 20, 2010 03:51 pm at 3:51 pm |
  20. Gwen

    So glad Pelosi is holding her own on this. The bill isn't perfect as none of them are but it is a start than can be edited and added to. It is better than doing nothing as the other side always does unless it means more money for them.

    March 20, 2010 03:54 pm at 3:54 pm |
  21. Pragmatic

    Stupak (who has adopted how many children?) will cheerfully sacrifice the health care for the people already born. He cares naught for seniors in the doughnut hole, those with pre-existing medical problems, the unemployed who are forced to choose between paying for rent, food & health care.

    Stupak is not "pro- life" .... he "luvs" what he calls "life" from conception to birth ... after that ... he could care less about their quality of life ....

    March 20, 2010 03:55 pm at 3:55 pm |
  22. Jesus

    This bill will be defeated.
    I have it on good authority.

    March 20, 2010 03:56 pm at 3:56 pm |
  23. jules sand-perkins

    It is simple to avoid unwanted pregnancies while still enjoying sex.
    Why can't everybody comprehend what to avoid mixing?

    March 20, 2010 04:02 pm at 4:02 pm |
  24. canadian

    what is the matter with you americans-how can you sit by and watch some citizens have to mortage their home for heart surgery-and other things like that- you can knock canada all you want but if a need a hip replaced i get it- heart operation i get it- cancer treatment i get it- oh sure i may have to wait a couple weeks but if it is realy urgent i get treated right away-and it costs me nothing- as a canadian- we are all equal under the health care- it scares me when i see americans loose everything they have worked all their lives to get– over a medical bill–seems really really stupid for such a propserous country-get your act together and get out of bed with the insurers and think about the general population-

    March 20, 2010 04:04 pm at 4:04 pm |
  25. C.P.

    Pelosi did'nt drain the swamp because she found out that if she did, the scum would die.

    March 20, 2010 04:05 pm at 4:05 pm |
1 2 3 4 5