The Post-Stupak Battle

Looking ahead to the voting on the final, reconciled Obamacare bill, Greg Sargent finds the battle lines have already been drawn in the House:

In a move that will intensify the coming war over how to treat abortion in the health care bill, more than three dozen House Dems have signed a letter to Nancy Pelosi firmly pledging to vote against the bill if it contains an anti-abortion amendment.

A source sends over a working copy of the letter without the signatories, and the source says it currently bears the signatures of 41 House Dems. They’re all vowing to vote No on a bill if it contains the Stupak amendment — enough to sink the bill:

As Members of Congress we believe that women should have access to a full range of reproductive health care. Health care reform must not be misused as an opportunity to restrict women’s access to reproductive health services.

The Stupak-Pitts amendment to H.R. 3962, The Affordable Healthcare for America Act, represents an unprecedented and unacceptable restriction on women’s ability to access the full range of reproductive health services to which they are lawfully entitled. We will not vote for a conference report that contains language that restricts women’s right to choose any further than current law.

That’s unequivocal, with no wiggle room. The Washington Post reported this morning that Rep. Diana DeGette had collected 40 signatures vowing a No vote, without noting the language of their vow or how this would be communicated.

Now we know — at least 41 House Dems are writing directly to Pelosi, telling her that they will not vote for anything “that contains language that restricts women’s right to choose any further than current law.”

In other words, if the final version of the reconciled Obamacare bill contains the anti-abortion language that the Stupak amendment had, it will fail in the House. There will be no Obamacare if that's the case.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz says that the Stupak Amendment will not be in that final bill as a result.

Things just got a whole lot more complicated. If I'm the GOP, or the ConservaDems vowing to kill this plan, you just need to put in the Stupak Amendment in the final bill and you win.

[UPDATE 3:15 PM] What mcjoan said:

This is the most expansive restriction on access to abortion Congress has passed. It goes well beyond Hyde, which has never been codified and which only governs federal, public plans. It's particularly galling that it comes under the umbrella of healthcare "reform."

Remember the promises? Reform was about expanding choices, not allowing government to come between you and your doctor, no one will lose their coverage, and if you like your current plan you get to keep it. Apparently being female is a preexisting condition that exempts us from the promises, too.

Stupak has to go. It's a dealbreaker.

[UPDATE 3:35 PM] And let's remember the Republicans in the House were united behind Stupak, because let's face it, they hate women.

Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Tex.), the head of the Republicans campaign committee, caused a stir at last night's Rules Committee meeting when he suggested that treating female-related health conditions was comparable to insurance-company imposed restrictions on smokers.

"Why should a woman pay more than a man?" asked New Jersey Democrat Frank Pallone, according to the Courthouse News Service.

"Well, we're all different," Sessions explained. "Why should a smoker pay more?" he said before interrupted.

Because a uterus is just an expensive option that costs American taxpayers money to your average Republican, and the less we have of them, the better off we are.