If Dems Appease Stupak, They Should Lose Their Jobs
06 March 2010 3:20 pm by Taylor Marsh
–originally posted on Huffington Post–
The Roman Catholic bishops signaled Thursday that if agreement is reached with House leaders on anti-abortion language, the church would work to get the votes needed to protect the provisions in the Senate — and thereby advance the shared goal with Democrats of health care reform. “We would strongly urge everyone, Democratic and Republican, to vote to waive the point of order,” Richard Doerflinger, an associate director of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, told POLITICO. “Whether it would be enough to get to 60 votes, I can’t predict. We would certainly try.” Bishops offer help with Senate
When the rise of Rep. Bart Stupak began, I wrote a post about Speaker Pelosi and 64 Democrats selling women out. Well, it seems that Pres. Obama and Congress are prepared to double down on that action by allowing Mr. Stupak to become the Democratic Henry Hyde on abortion at the expense of women who put them in office.
“Interference by the US Catholic bishops in healthcare reform does not help women,” said Jon O’Brien, president of Catholics for Choice. “The bishops claim that this is an issue of ‘conscience.’ However, in seeking to impose their views, the bishops show no regard for the consciences of millions of women in the United States who want the ability to prevent unintended pregnancies or have an abortion when they need it.” – Abortion could be health care deal breaker in house
So, why is no one in the House taking Stupak on?
On Friday, Rep. Anthony Weiner finally did. It’s a lonely job.
From Rep. Steney Hoyer we got only capitulation.
Jane Hamsher has called for the resignation of Rep. Lynn Woolsey as head of the progressive caucus. Seems Ms. Woolsey is all too eager to sign on to the Senate health care bill, even though it’s a bad bill and still doesn’t contain the one thing the public wants, some form of public option; plus including language never before put in writing that makes it more difficult for women to get full reproductive health care.
Now, I’m not a movement progressive, just a political analyst who can figure out pretty clearly what’s going on. Women are being told again by Democrats to stand aside, be quiet, and take one for the team, because the health care bill is more important than our individual rights. Oh, and because the bill isn’t about abortion. If it’s not about abortion then why is the leading Democratic anti abortion legislator being coddled and kowtowed to over it to make sure the language passes his test?
What about how Democratic, progressive and liberal women feel about Rep. Stupak’s legislation and the Senate health care bill?
Considering the fact that we help get Democrats elected, our concerns should be taken very seriously. Because if you think the Democratic base is demoralized, you should read my emails from women who have had it with the current Democratic crop, who are yet again selling out the best interests of women, while taking our votes for granted.
Even as wrong as conservatives are about women’s rights, at least they represent and support the voters who get them elected.
The Democratic Party is not and neither is Pres. Obama in this health care bill.
That the Democrats are going to such lengths to simultaneously ignore that the American public support a public option, while selling women out, is like punching a bad bruise.
Women not only pay more for health insurance, but we get screwed by it more often. The Senate bill that Obama has embraced, with the House prepared to suck it up to “save his presidency,” women are going to have to follow convoluted rules never before put into place in order to get full reproductive health care.
Most people respect the right to life crowd’s stance, even if it is pro selective life, putting the woman second. But the fact of the matter is that Griswold and Roe are settled law, with the majority of Americans wanting it to stay that way.
Rep. Stupak’s efforts are exactly what Rep. Henry Hyde did when he couldn’t overturn existing law. It doesn’t matter that Mr. Stupak is wrong on the facts about the current bill, which does not fund abortion, which isn’t really why he’s ranting in the first place.
Which brings me to another subject Democrats do not want to address, which goes beyond the current health care debate. Why are Democrats still accepting that poor women shouldn’t have access to full reproductive health care through the Hyde Amendment? Pres. Obama and Speaker Pelosi, Sen. Reid and many others continue to pontificate that Hyde is the law of the land. Concocted in the 1970s as a response to Roe, Rep. Henry Hyde was an anti abortionist zealot. But it’s the 21st century now, so why aren’t Democrats demanding poor women have access to reproductive health services, including abortion, through federal funds? Ah yes, because poor women don’t vote and don’t have a lobby to speak for them. After all, Griswold and Roe are established law, so there is no reason except for Hyde to prevent poor women from having equal access to self-determination, including reproductive health care, birth control and abortion. Democrats are saying that money and means are a prerequisite for having 100% control over your body. Evidently, poor women will continue to pay the price for being poor. And to quote the conservative line, Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps, you lazy bitches!
Unfortunately, Pres. Obama and leading Democrats, including Rep. Lynn Woolsey, are also not only letting Mr. Stupak get away with his grandstanding, but aiding him by making him a conservative star over women. With Democratic women expected to shut up and take it when our rights are being chipped away.
The right already has succeeded in lessening the number of doctors who perform abortion, sometimes through murder, what’s next?
If the Democratic Party won’t fight for women’s full reproductive rights in health care reform why should we continue to support them?
Because Republicans are worse?
Pretty soon that won’t be good enough. Because if no one will stand up to Stupak there’s no point in women voting for Democrats.
TM NOTE: Wanted to share the following comment made over at Huffington Post where this article is cross-posted, a conservative responding:
just-a-mechanic: The author, obviously from the left, speaks of individual rights… I’m left speechless after reading this. As a Conservative I can not stand abortion for any reason and I proudly preach pro-life. Yet the champion of individual rights in me contradicts my stance. I’m left only with an adamant opposition against abortion and no legitimate way to argue my stance.
I think Rahm and Obama will be surprised come 2012 if they are simply hoping that the liberal base (of which I am a member) is going to come out and work for their reelection by dutifully knocking on doors and doing the grunt work that the base is known for. The conventional wisdom that the pro-choice, pro-civil rights, pro-gay rights, pro-health care reform (not *insurance* reform) crowd will vote for them because we have no where else to go, may be tested. I live in MA and I know a lot of liberal dems who simply didn’t go vote for Coakley because they were fed up with being taken for granted by the dems.
Stupak is enjoying his 15 minutes of fame while he blurs the line between Church and State. I guess the GOP and Blue Dogs only like minimal government interference when it might get in the way of insurance, Wall Street and Big Pharma profits. But when it comes to reproductive freedom or issues like Terri Schiavo, they looooooooove a big, meddlesome government.
And what’s worse, Stupak is a liar:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/05/bart-stupak-abortion-clai_n_488085.html
“Present.”
(More change you can believe in).
Thanks for that input, secyclintonblog.
This isn’t about facts with Mr. Stupak, as it never is with abortion.
Though I hope everyone will read the comment I posted from HuffPost from a conservative. It’s very interesting.
heh-heh… Yep, you said it, JoeChi, but it’s coming from the entire Dem Party.
If the Democratic Party won’t fight for women’s full reproductive rights in health care reform why should we continue to support them?
Because Republicans are worse?
Sorry, but that’s a terrible strategy. A terrible, pathetic, self-loathing, ineffective strategy.
In fact, I would argue that the “Vote D because the R’s are so much worse.” is responsible for the mess the Dems are in today. After all, why should they put up a fight or fulfill their promises when you aren’t willing to walk away?
My apologies, that came off a bit harsh.
That said, the #1 rule of negotiations is that the only deal you have a chance of winning is the one that you’re willing to walk away from.
I will say this once again. If people do not boycott Domino’s Pizza and Curves for women’s health clubs, two companies that fund the antichoice movement any complaints about Antichoice Democrats appear just that, empty complaints which will solve very little.
In this climate of companies that control companies progressives need to petition the companies that have funded conservaties in congress.
Contact these 2 companies and demand that their CEOs to get the Catholic Bishops to back off and to get Stupak to withdraw his amendment and Ben Nelson withdraw his antichoice amendment and until that happens you refuse to do business with Dominos Pizza and Curves for women’s health clubs.
I also believe people can find a national profile company from Michigan, where Stupak comes from and start a boycott of that company and get Stupak to withdraw all antichoice amendments and that you will boycott their products until Stupak backs off.
Then again most people will not do this, so wallow in your antichoice compants but do not blame me.
http://www.democratz.org
Each of us has to find our own role, our own ways to refuse the expectation we will “shut up and take it when our rights are being chipped away.”
democratz, I am in full agreement that actions are needed; I honestly don’t know how effective boycotts can be, but I’m guessing a multi-pronged effort is required, and boycotts are certainly one tactic. I don’t read or hear discussions about what’s happening, efforts to understand and analyze, as unproductive “complaints.” Of course, there is the danger that we never get any further than the conversations, but I don’t think it’s an either / or choice.
JoeChI (comment on 06 March 2010 at 4:35 pm): I totally agree and the fact is, it’s been a successful democratic strategy for years and I will regretfully admit that I have voted for Democrats for precisely that reason- not so much voting for the Democrat as voting against a conservative Republican and I’m not exactly proud of that. But for the first time I really am thinking I am going to have a very hard time voting for the Democratic ticket in 2012 because as you inferred, we all become part of the problem. Obama’s going to make all these concessions (in health reform) and not a single Republican will end up voting for it anyway.
Obama’s policies on Gitmo, executive branch power, refusing to hold Bush officials accountable for torture, the selling out of health care reform to the pharmaceutical and insurance industry while sticking it to poor women, doing little to nothing for gay rights (oh yeah, they are going to take a few years to “study” what effect repealing DADT will have), backtracking on holding the KSM terror trial in NY Federal District Court, pursuing the same hawkish foreign policy, no human rights policy to speak of, no financial reform and on and on and on. People like Rahm Emanuel take the progressive base for granted precisely because come 2012, they will argue that we’d be worse off with a Republican in office. It may be time to turn the tables on them and we are already seeing that with so many progressives speaking out against almost everything the admin. is doing. Rahm better reconsider his strategy because Republican Lite isn’t a platform for change, it’s a sell-out.
If women and Dems allow this shit to happen…FU*K EM. They DESERVE it.
Hello Taylor and Fellow Mashians,
I have just one questions…..wouldn’t the catholic Bishops/churches direct negotiations violate their tax exemption status? I’m just saying….if they want to participate then they should lose their so directly then they should lose their exemption status…..and judging from all that money they lost from those settlements for the priest playing “Hide the Hot tomalley” with those alter boys….just maybe they would want to STFU about women’s productive rights until they can correct their moral compass….
*Corrected**
Hello Taylor and Fellow Mashians,
I have just one questions…..wouldn’t the catholic Bishops/churches direct negotiations violate their tax exemption status? I’m just saying….if they want to participate so directly then they should lose their exemption status…..and judging from all that money they lost from those settlements for the priest playing “Hide the Hot tomalley” with those alter boys….just maybe they would want to STFU about women’s productive rights until they can correct their moral compass….
A question (and I say this as someone who has said before that I am pro-choice, but I also recognize the long history of the Henry Hyde amendment outlawing federal funds being for abortion): why is it OK to say, Roe Vs. Wade is long-standing law. So is the Hyde amendment. Like it or not, it is accepted part of US law. (I would say that many anti-abortion types would say, like it or not, it’s accepted part of US law.)
This is not optimal to me, but it wasn’t before, either. I also remember a time where I had to pay more for mammograms, because insurance wouldn’t cover it. It was maybe 1 year, or two — I was VERY not happy, but I did it. Not everything is covered by insurance. It never was and it never will be.
Abortion is a very tricky issue. You see it as reproductive rights. While I am pro-choice, I have too many pro-life friends to see it in just that way. It’s just a very emotional issue fraught with factors thaat go beyond covering XYand Z. It just is.
dafederalist says: “and judging from all that money they lost from those settlements for the priest playing “Hide the Hot tomalley” with those alter boys….just maybe they would want to STFU about women’s productive rights until they can correct their moral compass….”
Let us not forget nor neglect to mention the latest GAY PROSTITUTION RING being worked from THE POPE’S OWN attendents!!!!!!! These people have GOT to be fu*king kidding!
Beth in suburban Chicago says: ” why is it OK to say, Roe Vs. Wade is long-standing law. So is the Hyde amendment. Like it or not, it is accepted part of US law. (I would say that many anti-abortion types would say, like it or not, it’s accepted part of US law.)”
Because your friends and apparently you don’t understand the fifferance between Supreme Court rullings regarding “CIVIL RIGHTS” for ALL Americans as opposed to legeslated laws by the legeslature regarding FUNDING.
“Abortion is a very tricky issue. You see it as reproductive rights. While I am pro-choice, I have too many pro-life friends to see it in just that way.”
Abortion is only a “tricky” question if you are trying to impose YOUR superstition based views and feelings upon another person. If you are against abortion and you’re a woman DON’T HAVE ONE. If you’re against abortion and you’re a man, do like the repugnantklan elected officials or the Pope’s personnal assistant do, GO GAY or if hetero KEEP YOUR ZIPPER UP!
As for your having to pay for mammograms, so your point is there should never be any progress or redress for past wrongs or unfair behavior?
Your post illustrates very clearly the poor job done in the past regarding education in CIVICS and how our government works.
“wouldn’t the catholic Bishops/churches direct negotiations violate their tax exemption status?”
That’s the money shot isn’t it? I say abolish ALL taxe exemption for ALL religious/superstitious activities, donations and properties. UNLESS they allow it for ALL superstitions/religions and ALL activities and properties with superstitious/religious conotations.
If the GOVERNMENT says Chatholic is taxe exempt but Pastaferian ISN’T haven’t they ESTABLISHED Chatholic as a REAL religion and denied Pastaferian is NOT? ISN’T THAT DOING EXACTLY WHAT THE CONSTITUTION SAYS CONGRESS SHALL NOT DO?!!!!!
I have come to the conclusion that to continue to support the Democratic Party in the face of all the betrayals is the very definition of insanity.I do not understand why liberals are not in the streets with Michael Moore. Maybe I don’t understand the demographics any more. Maybe liberals are all old dinasaurs with aching backs and knees and hips with no youth to lead the parade.
You go ahead Ms. Marsh, and start voting with the Republicans. You might as well, because ever since your Goddess Queen Hillay Clinton lost the primary, all you do anyway is complain and demonize Obama and the Dems. I often wonder if you would have held her feet to the fire as you do Obama if she was President, though I think we know the ridiculous answer to that, don’t we?
Honestly, you used to be one of my 3 favorite blogs; now it’s like getting on some foreign blog I’ve never seen. My only question is this; once you help put in the Romney’s, Palin’s and Ryan’s of the world, will you still bitch and moan so much? Because that’s where we are headed. Jesus, you sound like some talking head like Luntz, who is doing everything he can, through language, to make sure Dems lose out in 2010 and 2012.
I too am not happy with some things Obama has not done, but you just look ridiculous posing that voting for them is just as bad as voting for the Rebugs. Let’s just ignore the things he has done, shall we and focus on just the things you don’t like. Let’s continue to hold a grudge over the primary in ‘08…
Here’s to voting for the Repubs in 2012, because, well, the Dems aren’t doing everything we want and the Rebugs will do everything they said they would do. Yeah, that sounds like good logic to me. Sign me up.
I know I’ll be burned on the cross over this, but I don’t care anymore. Your seething hatred and anger of HC losing is still with you today, obviously, and it makes you look petty. Gone is the day of Ms. Independent Journalism. Gone, gone, gone.
chazmonk..if that is what you think you don’t drop in often enough.
I oppose abortion. I also oppose war and capital punishment. To be consistent I suppose one would have to support abortion, war and capital punishment. Abortion is a very complex issue with all sides holding valid arguments. The best that can be hoped for is that it’s rare, safe and legal. Those who believe that the government should not fund abortion should call on the government to also stop funding war and capital punishment. That would at least indicate some consistency on their part. Peace
JoeCHI says:
“In fact, I would argue that the “Vote D because the R’s are so much worse.” is responsible for the mess the Dems are in today. After all, why should they put up a fight or fulfill their promises when you aren’t willing to walk away?”
Thank you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I’ve been saying this for years – Women, Progressives, Gays/Lesbian, Enviromentalist, & etc have been doormats to the Democratic Elites for years. Until WE, i.e. the group above, are willing to walk away from the Dems and let them loose they don’t have to pay us any attention at all.
Frankly this is a question that doesn’t need even to be asked – we all know the Dems will sell out women’s right to choose. The Big O has already told the so-called progressives in the House if they don’t cave his Presidency is over and the Health Care battle is lost.
Sadly they both are already over – nobody is willing to admit it!
By-the-by, I ask again where is NARAL and their supporters? Why aren’t they raising hell about this?
You are a conservative and an interventionist on foreign policy if you believe that…….(1) we should keep troops in Iraq beyond 2011 (2) Obama was correct to escalate the war in Afghanistan by “surging” 30,000 additional troops into that country (3) extending the Patriot Act for another 12 months was justified. If you agree with one or more of those points than you have aligned yourself with Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin, Dick Cheny, most Republicans and every neocon. If, on the other hand, you disagree with all of those positions then you are aligned with the real Progressives (LIberals) on foreign policy matters. Democrat or Republican it makes no difference. It’s war and Peace that counts. Peace
Lake Lady
I agree Chazmonk either hasn’t really been following this site very long or he’s one of those who can’t bear criticism of Obama.
I agree with most of your comments, and I certainly feel the pain of being taken for granted by the Dems, but I do have a warning: the Right is far worse. We simply cannot allow our grievances with current leadership to misdirect our efforts and drain support from right-wing opposition.
Abortion is possibly the most complicated and emotional issues we have as a people. I am personally anti-war, opposed to the death penalty and against abortion. But I understand that some wars must be fought (neither of our two present campaigns) and that abortion is sometimes the only legitimate option.
I will personally stand in support of a woman’s right to choose and against any nonsense prohibiting federal money to fund such. But at the same time, I will demand that policy support appropriate choice, educate the people involved, deter misuse and offer real alternative options.
Please tell me, am I just off base? It seems to ne that the conversation has to change; that we need to stop choosing sides and find a way to work toward real solutions. Personally, I think a third major political part is the answer, but until we get there, please don’t forsake your own best interest and all the crazies on the right to gain back hard-fought ground.
————————
http://www.thinkersjam.com
I think, therefore I jam
To David Paulson;
I would happily dump the Democratic Party if there were a third option but there isn’t and frankly won’t be. Its far easier to assert our ownership of the Democratic Party than to build a new one.
Frankly we have the power to “reform” the Democratic Party anytime we want to but unless we are willing to use it we have no power. Your post really lays out the problem quite well – when you say “please don’t forsake your own best interest and all the crazies on the right to gain back hard-fought ground.” you are essentially telling us that its best to cave. Its a sad fact but we have allowed the Elites of the Dem Party to put us in a situation where we either walk and let the crazies win or give in. I call it the “doormat dilemma” and the progressives in the Democratic Party have let things escalate to a point where we are going to have to kill off part of the Democratic Party to save it. There aren’t any other options. Its not like we get offered half a loaf or even a third of a loaf. We are getting no part of a loaf and until we walk that’s all we will ever get.
Have you noticed that its always the progressives that have to give in? Please ask yourself why? Well we know that answer – the blue dogs will walk and the system knows it so we will always loose and they will always win. Until you and I are willing to walk the Democratic Party will move more and more to the right.
mwfolsom,
Again I understand and sympathize, but please forgive me, because I think your post proves an important point: you’re fed up with the Democratic Party and believe your only option is to walk. Without rendering any judgment of your particular reasons, I can safely assert that this is another example of the state of American politics — it’s another helping of “either/or.”
Of course, since you don’t actually have another option, your failure to support those who most closely align with your beliefs is actually support for the opposition — it is cutting of your nose . . . You’re right that it’s a messed up situation, but do you really want another King George in office? We may never recover!
We are so used to the two-party tango that it seems we can’t even envision what a healthy system would look like anymore. I can tell you this though, just the existence of a major third party would break the back and forth, “either/or” mentality. It would necessitate honest dialog, which is the key ingredient missing from today’s version of American politics.
Let me just say this: I don’t know you or how closely our political views are aligned. Just from reading your posts, I assume that you’re probably a little further left than I, but I could be completely wrong. The really cool thing is that it doesn’t matter. You sound like an intelligent person who’s capable of both voicing your opinion and listening to others — add a willingness to engage in dialog, and I’m certain we could find a common ground.
The problem isn’t the left, and it’s not even the right. The problem is a propensity for finger pointing, name calling and plain old hyperbole. It’s party line BS and it serves nobody but the politicians themselves.
The solution is to first admit that there are always trade-offs to be made, and second to have the conversation needed to decide on them. Everyone needs to climb out of their trenches, shake hands and start the serious work of resolution.
Walking is just another round of the never-ending cycle that plagues our Country. The only people that win in that scenario are that upper 1% — they created the stalemate and are perfectly happy to keep it intact.
You say that a third party won’t happen. I’m not so sure.
————————–
http://www.thinkersjam.com
I think, therefore I jam
To Dave:
I would really love it if a 3rd Party actually “occurred” but there are several reason I believe it won’t – chief among them are history and form of Government. I lived for 5+ years in Canada and watched their Parliamentary Gov operate. One of the best Gov’s I ever saw while there was a coalition Gov. formed by the Conservative Party (majority component) and the NDP (minority component). Please understand that the Conservatives in Canada are to the Left of Obama and the NDP is way to the left of 99% of the Democratic Party. So what did the folks in Canada get – a fairly sane Administration – careful on financial matters and progressive on social matters. That happened because they have a Parliamentary system – we don’t. To make matters worse we have no tradition of power sharing in our system. So that’s why you can’t grow a 3rd Party in the US – its automatically a “spoiler” till it replaces one of the two established parties.
When you said “your failure to support those who most closely align with your beliefs is actually support for the opposition” you seem to be concerned about my decision to “opt out” of automatically voting for any Democrat the system spits out since it would be helping the Republicans. Unfortunately this is true no matter if I simply don’t vote or vote for a 3rd Party candidate – the results are exactly the same. Sadly this is the dynamic we face and the one any 3rd Party Candidate would also face – yet another reason why a the establishment of a real 3rd Party isn’t likely. Because of all this the only way we could ever get to a 3rd Party is for it to spring fully formed out of thin air and simply replace one of he other major Parties (see paragraph above).
I can see no way around it – either the Progressives in the Democratic Party remain a Doormat or they stand back, let the system know they won’t play anymore and frankly let Republican win. There simply are no other options and the Elites in the Democratic Party understand and use this against us.
I am 55 years old and have been playing the “lesser of two evils game” for way too long. All that has done is allow the Democratic Party to move further and further to the right. I’ve worked hard for the Party and think my rights are as great as any DINO out there. The sad fact I haven’t realized till now is that the only functional difference between Progressives and DINOs in the eyes of the Party Elites is that they will walk and so far I haven’t. That’s the big difference and it can’t be refuted. So, tell me who will any Democratic Politician pay attention to? The one that always supports them or the one they have to work to keep?
The moment Progressives walk the game changes and the Democratic Party will have to pay attention to us – until that happens we are and will remain doormats.