The health care bill got to 60 votes by bribing… er, um… providing an anti-abortion Senator with needed money for his state. But winning passage of the bill like this obscures the question of whether abortion should be part of government funded health care since the opposition is religious in nature and abortion, like fixing a broken bone, is legal.

What started as Sen. Ben Nelson’s personal stand against covering abortion with taxpayer money translated, somehow, into millions of dollars in federal aid for his home state.

The Nebraska Democrat, following weeks of negotiations with his caucus, finally agreed to back the Senate’s health care reform bill this weekend after Democratic leaders made a series of concessions. Nelson’s support gives Democrats the 60 votes they need to overcome a filibuster, barring any last-minute defections.

But critics by Sunday were heavily questioning Nelson’s motivations, given that the abortion restrictions he sought and won did not satisfy several major anti-abortion lawmakers and groups and that it took a major federal payoff to his state to seal the deal.

Should Abortion Be Covered In Health Care Legislation?

View Results
Create a Poll




  1. Animby says:

    Another reason to vote out all incumbents. That man can claim he was representing his constituents but, what he should have been doing is voting their conscience. I suspect most Nebraskans would vote against Federal coverage of abortions. A man who sells his vote is probably going to see some of those Federal millions creep into his bank account.

  2. Dallas says:

    Of course it should. Last time I looked it was a legal medical procedure. However, I’m OK to leave it out to move forward and address the bigger issue of health insurance reform.

    If the Christian Taliban wants to make a fuss over this and stall progress, I say throw’em a bone and move on. I totally understand compromise.

  3. Faxon says:

    Facelifts are also a legal medical procedure, cheesestick.

  4. dusanmal says:

    @#2 It is elective procedure. Law strictly exempts sickness/rape/incest cases as legitimate. You want abortion just because you were reckless in your own sex life – pay for it or pay for separate coverage for it if you expect to do many … Pregnancy is not disease …

    And if you pull out the “social aspect” of it (oh, who will pay for poor unwanted babies?) – that is NOT health care as well. It is social issue. One who wants to deal with unwanted babies via abortion paid by taxpayers should propose that as a separate, social issues bill (and good luck getting any votes for it).

  5. Dallas says:

    I said I am OK with the compromise and it makes sense. States would be permitted to ban insurance coverage of abortions except in cases of rape, incest or when the life of the mother is in jeopardy.

    That didn’t do much to please the anti-abortion Taliban under ANY circumstances but nothing ever does. I’m OK with that too.

  6. TheCommodore says:

    As always in these situations, it’s something that should be left between the doctor and the patient.

    But ya gotta admit – given the number of abortions that are done yearly, what percentage are done to save the life of the mother? As opposed to saving the convenience of life to the mother? C’mon, don’t call ’em the Christian talibin – there are alot of kids having sex while stupid. Sex should require a license. You have a job or income? Have you taken sex ed? You can have a license. Failure to comply to the rules will result in 18 years to life raising a child.

  7. Dallas says:

    #6 Agreed that abortion should not be a birth control method. IMHO, a big contributor to abortions is lack of sex education and carelessness. The two are linked.

    You can be naive to equate people having abortions as those having face lifts but I dismiss that as getting in rhetorical space in order to sweep the above issue under the carpet.

    As far “Taliban”? Yes, there is a Christian Taliban fringe and appropriately addressed. These extreme religious zealots don’t wear a turban but there fanaticism at the expense of others is effectively the same as the “bad Taliban”.

  8. Brian says:

    Could we have a “Don’t give a rat’s ass” option?

  9. Steve S says:

    # 8 Brian said,
    “Could we have a “Don’t give a rat’s ass” option?”
    .
    We already do. It is called “not posting”.
    And it is fine that you don’t care about about an issue such as this. The government will be perfectly happy to use your tax money on things that others decided for you. You see they don’t care either. After all, it is their money.

  10. bobbo, an advocate of Democracy says:

    As killing a human life in its early stages of development does not raise any Constitutional Rights, such coverage should be at the will of the people. Pro or Con with whatever rules are deemed appropriate.

    I would vote for a program that ENCOURAGED abortions because society does not benefit from unwanted kiddies. $500 now for an abortion or %50,000 per year to wharehouse them in prisons?

    Its your call but it would be “nice” if you included the financial burden somewhere into your calculus. Those not funding abortion should also pay a “special tax” for the care and support of all the kiddies whose parents can’t afford them.

    We don’t want to be hypocrites do we?

  11. sargasso says:

    The abortion debate, always flushes the loons.

  12. Dr Dodd says:

    Although abortion is murder I’ll set that aside for the moment and just ask why not let the people responsible pay for the abortion?

    Doesn’t seem right to shift the responsibility away from the people that cause the “problem”. Do that and what’s to keep them from doing it again and again and again?

  13. bobbo, an advocate of Democracy says:

    #13–Dr Dodd==retardedly you ask:

    Although abortion is murder// Expressly by law its not. This asshole moralizing ignoring facts is good “conservative non-think.” You lose all credibility when you start with such stupidity.

    I’ll set that aside for the moment /// Hey, why not speak the truth that you oppose abortion on moral and other grounds and WISH it were illegal? Stupid not to.

    and just ask why not let the people responsible pay for the abortion?/// Because idgit==they don’t have the money to do so or they seek dangerous back alley abortions that cause all sorts of other problems/costs to society.

    Doesn’t seem right to shift the responsibility away from the people that cause the “problem”. // Don’t confuse responsibility which does not shift with ability to pay that does.

    Do that and what’s to keep them from doing it again and again and again? /// They do anyway and THATS THE PROBLEM. Stop your penalizing morality getting your rocks off by shaking your finger at people and think of the ((unwanted)) kiddies and their impact on society/the world.

    What a deep thinker. “I don’t like it so I’ll make it illegal.” Very deep thinking indeed.

  14. Dr Dodd says:

    #15-bobbo

    No matter if you agree or not, abortion is murder. The reason I say that is if “YOU” had been aborted you wouldn’t be here to spout your usual stupidity. Alas, here you are.

    If teenagers can’t afford a child, and I don’t know many that can, then maybe a little restraint in the form of responsibility is in order.

    No can’t have that, the little cherubs might have to do without… the horror.

  15. Obamaforever says:

    From: Obamaforever
    To: All

    This is addressed to all the anti-choice people who want a perfect world-for them:

    COAT-HANGERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  16. ramuno says:

    So under this bill, are they going to charge women for coat hangers?

  17. Obamaforever says:

    From: Obamaforever
    To: Dr. Dodd per #16

    First things first. A doctorate in what? Perfect Worldism? or Stupidity? Please tell me a doctorate in what.

    A fetus is a parasite. After 9 months the parasite comes out—to the benefit of the parasite and the mother!!!! In other words the fetus is not a separate part of the woman’s body.

    Dr. Stupid, the fetus is like a tumor that the woman can choose to remove before 9 months or the fetus can come out at 9 months. This is true—harsh but true.

    Get over it, Dr. Idiot!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  18. rvsw says:

    A choice of whether to have a baby or not is in the Bill of Rights – that seems to be forgotten in all this arguing. It is in THE BILL OF RIGHTS people. All the religious zealot,republican,leftist,extremist,idiots need to get over it! We the people spoke up on this already and made a decision, took it to the Supreme Court, put it in writing, added to the B of R. Get passed it. Let’s go forward.

  19. Dr Dodd says:

    #19-Obamaforever

    Excuse me for noticing, but it appears the cheese has slid off your cracker.

  20. Obamaforever says:

    From: Obamaforever
    To: Dr Dodd
    per #21

    Don’t choke on my cheese you rat!!!!!!!!!!!!

  21. Dr Dodd says:

    #22-Obamaforever

    Oh come on, you call that an insult. At least make it worth my time.

    Amaze me!

  22. Greg Allen says:

    It galls me that Nelson gets bribed like this but I suppose we have to pay-off the bastard for the sake of average Americans who are being killed (often literally!) by the insurance companies.

    But this should be the last damn penny Nebraska gets — and not a another dime for Lieberman, Mary Landrieu or any of the pissant GOP.

  23. Greg Allen says:

    >> # 1 Animby said, on December 20th, 2009 at 8:17 am
    >> Another reason to vote out all incumbents.

    For the love of Country, don’t vote out the candidates who tried to fix this disastrous health care shakedown the conservatives have gotten America into.

    Some of our elected leaders did the moral and fiscally responsible thing — vote out the bastards who serve the big money insurance companies.

    This includes ALL of the GOP and a handful of conservative Democrats

  24. Obamaforever says:

    From: Obamaforever
    To: Dr Dodd per #23

    Let’s see said the blind man to his deaf son. Dr. Dodd, the best part of you ran down your old man’s leg and your momma licked up the rest.

    You wanted an amazing good insult!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  25. TooManyPuppies says:

    If it’s covered, it should only be for cases of rape, incest or if the mother’s life is in danger if she were to carry to term. Other than that, they can come up with the money themselves.

  26. chris says:

    #27 Obamaforever

    Are you talking about insults? Did you not see my earlier thoughts about you?

    Here is a reprint of me, from the “lemonade stand” thread, dominating you. No response then on your part so I thought I would let you have another opportunity to respond:

    Now, as they say in politics, to my esteemed friend Obamaforever. You have obviously mastered no arguments, facts or figures. You can marshal no blistering offense and cannot mount a convincing defense.

    When you see an argument that you disagree with you ought to respond to it with rhetorical strength AND poise.

    What you’ve got right now is without content. There are a bunch of people here who I disagree with completely, but at least I respect their ability to explain(or have) a viewpoint.

    /end snip.

    I was just worried you had missed it. 😀

  27. Obamaforever says:

    From: Obamaforever
    To: Chris per #31

    Dr Dodd, PhD in Stupidity, wanted an amazing good insult. He got one and he has not been back.

    Heart attack? If there is a god!!!!!!!!!!!

    bye, Church Lady

  28. chris says:

    Dr. Dodd,

    I don’t think abortion is murder, but since you do it’s a pretty hard gap to bridge.

    I do wonder if you think it’s still murder before the fetus could live(assisted or unassisted) outside of the mother’s body. This is why abortion is more regulated in the third trimester(by some states). Since technology has improved since then maybe we should push the restricted period back…

    I think women should have the right, absolute, to remove a fetus they don’t want. If the state doesn’t pay for abortions does it have to pay for a method of extraction that keeps the fetus viable?

    What it boils down to, in my view, is if/when an embryo/fetus deserves legal respect. I think not until birth.

    If you think legal personhood goes further back then where is the transition? If the “morning after” pill is bad, for you, how do you argue that something microscopic should have legal rights?

  29. Named says:

    Here we go again!

    http://mypage.direct.ca/w/writer/anti-tales.html

    “In 1990, in the Boston area, Operation Rescue and other groups were regularly blockading the clinics, and many of us went every Saturday morning for months to help women and staff get in. As a result, we knew many of the ‘antis’ by face. One morning, a woman who had been a regular ‘sidewalk counselor’ went into the clinic with a young woman who looked like she was 16-17, and obviously her daughter. When the mother came out about an hour later, I had to go up and ask her if her daughter’s situation had caused her to change her mind. ‘I don’t expect you to understand my daughter’s situation!’ she angrily replied. The following Saturday, she was back, pleading with women entering the clinic not to ‘murder their babies.'” (Clinic escort, Massachusetts)

    This is a woman’s health matter, not birth control. I don’t expect the unintelligent to understand that yet… but maybe one day.

  30. Animby says:

    #29 Mr Fusion: I respectfully disagree with your contention that because abortions are (actually “may be”) legal procedures, they should be covered. If you mean ANY legal medical procedure should be covered, then I withdraw my disagreement. But, in the real world, if I want this bump removed from my nose, then that is an elective procedure and my insurance wouldn’t cover it. Likewise, if a woman wants that bump out of her belly because she’s not sure who the daddy is, then that, too, ought to be an elective procedure. Now, if someone punches me in the nose for thinking Soundwash is an idiot, then that trauma should be covered. Similarly, if a woman is raped or the pregnancy threatens her life or health (yes, even mental health), then it should be covered.

    I don’t wish to bring in my own morality here. I have done a few (very few) therapeutic abortions in my life. It is the women who use abortion as a form of birth control who piss me off.

    BTW, if elective abortions are covered, then I submit, elective sterilizations (women AND men) should also be covered.


1

Bad Behavior has blocked 5814 access attempts in the last 7 days.