By Jacqueline Klingebiel

Nov 8, 2009 12:03pm

Brazile: Stupak Amendment: ‘Outlaws Abortion’

Democratic Strategist Donna Brazile said on the roundtable this morning that she thinks the Stupak Amendment which was added to the health care bill that passed the House last night effectively makes abortion illegal.  Will that provision survive the Senate?  Was it smart politics for the Democrats? 

Watch the roundtable debate HERE:

- George Stephanopoulos

User Comments

Illegal? I do not think so. All it has done is remove a largely elective procedure from being paid for by the public.

Posted by: Thinking | November 8, 2009, 12:12 pm 12:12 pm

What really needs to be added by amendment is that any group that claims non profit organization will no longer be allowed to sell insurance of any kind you think aarp will back that.

Posted by: earl | November 8, 2009, 12:13 pm 12:13 pm

Yep. I have to agree with her on this one. The insurance companies that can’t pay for it under the Stupak amendment won’t and the other insurance companies will follow suit quickly because that’s what insurance companies do.
And it is a stupid, stupid thing the democrats did last night. It is something that will divide the party.

Posted by: jan | November 8, 2009, 12:20 pm 12:20 pm

Hmmmmmm! If abortion wasn’t in the bill as Obama said why did it have to be removed? If it wasn’t really in the bill why was PPA infuriated by its removal?
I consider lawyer, congressional and presidential doublespeak in the same category as lies.
But the real crisis is the deficit and debt which NOT ONE SEEMS WILLING TO ADDRESS!

Posted by: Ed Taylor | November 8, 2009, 12:46 pm 12:46 pm

I enjoy watching Brazile during the Round Table discussions ‘cuz I can get up to get myself another cup of coffee. If whe were ever to say the slightest negative word about the POTUS, it would be a first!

Posted by: justj joey | November 8, 2009, 12:50 pm 12:50 pm

Illegal because its not paid for with public funds? That’s left logic for you.

Posted by: Rob | November 8, 2009, 1:19 pm 1:19 pm

I am amazed that one political party can be called “the party of death” and live with it. I am further amazed that so many people can belong to “the party of death” and see nothing wrong with it.
But even further amazement that some can vote for them yet consider themselves Christians!

Posted by: Ed Taylor | November 8, 2009, 1:42 pm 1:42 pm

I think the people who support abortion rights should get together and form an abortion insurance if they think this is such a big deal. I’m pro-choice, however, we shouldn’t be having so many abortions that we can’t afford to pay them ourselves.

Posted by: Cindy | November 8, 2009, 2:24 pm 2:24 pm

I guess a soul begins at conception? If you feel its wrong,change the law.As of now its a legal procedure and should be covered by any insurance.

Posted by: wayne | November 8, 2009, 3:31 pm 3:31 pm

Brazile’s twisted logic gives great insight into what the far left is really looking to accomplish with “health care reform”, which is a complete government takeover of the health care system. Otherwise, she’d have no cause to say that prohibiting government funds from paying for abortion is tantamount to outlawing the procedure itself. She is accidentally acknowledging what Dems are trying to keep hush-hush, which is that they are essentially planning on the government being the sole administrator of health insurance plans once passage of the bill occurs.
The far left has shown us their cards– now it’s up to the rest of us, who still believe in the freedoms guaranteed us by the U.S. Constitution, to resist the usurping of individual freedoms that the left is trying to spring on us.
This isn’t about health care. It’s about power. With the left, it always is.

Posted by: CH | November 8, 2009, 4:49 pm 4:49 pm

I didn’t ask when a soul begins. I asked what happens to the soul when abortion occurs. Does it go back to heaven?

Posted by: Cindy | November 8, 2009, 5:13 pm 5:13 pm

I don’t follow the elective procedure argument at all. Pregnancy is a condition in the strictest definition of the word (like all of terms used in healthcare) You seek treatment for pregnancy. Abortions can be performed for psycho therapeutic reasons as well as for reasons of risk to physical health of mother or child. Erections are equally “elective” and I don’t care to cover those either. Total Knee Replacement is also elective if you follow that logic! This is a giant step backwards!

Posted by: lovebugs | November 8, 2009, 5:19 pm 5:19 pm

During the war in Iraq, the left would often degrade those on the right who supported the war by saying, “Well, why don’t you go and fight there if you are so supportive of the war.” Well, I think those on the right should use that logic with those on the left regarding healthcare: “If you are so for it, then why don’t you pay for it.” After all, the wealth in this country is controlled by liberals. In fact, wealthy liberals outnumber wealthy conservatives by 4:1.

Posted by: Sad Day | November 8, 2009, 5:39 pm 5:39 pm

Ms. B. Always provides grist for my mill, but I prefer her to some other liberal commentators, she is usually predictable, yet thoughtful.
Having said that, she ignores the reality of HCR not passing if abortions were to be covered. That glorious 5 vote victory would have become a 20-25 vote loss for Speaker Pelosi & President Obama (who has now firmly lashed himself to this specific bill) We can finally have an informed debate as the Senate prepares to take HCR up).

Posted by: N2vip | November 8, 2009, 5:59 pm 5:59 pm

justjjoey, I’m an Obama supporter myself, but I’m also convinced that Brazile has been having erotic fantasies about the guy from the moment she first set eyes on him. Her slavish and uncritical devotion disturbs me. Even those of us who are rooting for him don’t need or admire that. Objective analysis is more important and more useful.

Posted by: Eleonora27 | November 8, 2009, 6:04 pm 6:04 pm

Insurance companies will continue to pay for abortions because abortions save insurance companies money. If is far cheaper to pay for an abortion than pay for the delivery of a baby and decades of health care.

Posted by: Allen | November 8, 2009, 6:08 pm 6:08 pm

wayne, just because it’s a legal procedure doesn’t mean all insurance should cover it any more than they should cover legal elective cosmetic surgeries. for all these years we’ve heard that abortion is about a woman’s “choice” about her own body. remember the old rallying cry “keep your laws off my body”? well, go ahead and choose to have an abortion, but don’t say i have to pay for it.

Posted by: davidfrat21 | November 8, 2009, 6:09 pm 6:09 pm

being a republican , and a pro-lifer, I can personally thank all the democrats who are taking the responsibility of paying for abortions out of the tax payers hands and the insurance company’s hands; I imagine the horrific numbers of infanticide that have been taking place for all these years will surely decrease. God willing.

Posted by: lisa turner | November 8, 2009, 6:19 pm 6:19 pm

During the campaign, Obama made it clear that a government takeover of healthcare was his plan. He didn’t use those words, of course, but the result would be a takeover. He softened his position (word play, that is) just enough to get the really uninformed on his side. Anyone who thinks TRILLIONS of new debt every year won’t matter down the road will vote for anything this nut and his lemmings want.

Posted by: s | November 8, 2009, 6:50 pm 6:50 pm

“But even further amazement that some can vote for them yet consider themselves Christians!” Straight from a ignoramus mindset. Stupak is a Christian, pro-life as are many of the democrats. The party of death, it would seem, is the one that reigned over 75% of the abortions in this country-the party of Bush.
The Bishops support the health care bill from the House as it is now written so they side with the dems and despite some of their horrendous mistakes, they are Christian.

Posted by: Erik | November 8, 2009, 8:01 pm 8:01 pm

Well its final now. The Pope now controls congress. So much for separation of church and state.

Posted by: Lewis Balentine | November 8, 2009, 8:14 pm 8:14 pm

Illegal?
Not for the rich or those able to pay for their own insurance.
For everyone else, not illegal, but you have to foot the whole bill yourself. Good luck.

Posted by: Tell the Truth | November 8, 2009, 8:33 pm 8:33 pm

Anyone who thinks TRILLIONS of new debt every year won’t matter down the road will vote for anything this nut and his lemmings want.
- Posted by: s | Nov 8, 2009 6:50:18 PM
That’s 1 trillion for 10 years, not 1 trillion a year. Talk about being “uninformed.”
That’s about what the U.S. will have spent in Iraq after 10 years.
The difference is that Americans will actually get some benefit out of the health care bill. In fact, all of the money will be staying in the U.S., not being paid to Kurds, Sunni and Shia head honchos to get along.
Still waiting for the Iraq war to pay for itself? Don’t hold your breath.

Posted by: Tell the Truth | November 8, 2009, 8:40 pm 8:40 pm

Notice how seniors love their SOCIALIST MEDICARE ….dump Medicare and give the seniors a few hundred extra buck a month and tell them to “pay for it themselves” after all that is what they are telling the rest of the conuntry when it comes to universal heathcare coverage ….. THEM LET THEM WHINE ABOUT INSURANCE COMPANIES …..

Posted by: fnpmitchreturns | November 8, 2009, 8:51 pm 8:51 pm

Funny. I don’t want my tax dollars to fund murder either so no more funding for elective procedures like drone strikes, precision bombing, and patrols in a country that will never be subdued.
Can I get that in an amendment?

Posted by: Stan | November 8, 2009, 9:15 pm 9:15 pm

When did it get to be a fact in our country that we each get to say for what our own tax dollars can pay? I don’t believe in a lot that goes on, and I am sure I could find mobs of people to object along with with me on some things on which taxes are spent. So, do we get to say that taxes cannot be used on whatever issue with which we don’t agree? Abortion opponents are bullies who force their opinion on the rest of us. They have rights that no one else has. They control tax moneys without going through the legal channels of getting laws changed. The ACLU should get involved in this. Whatever one thinks of abortion, this is WRONG!!

Posted by: Goody Lou | November 8, 2009, 9:22 pm 9:22 pm

Most women pay for their own abortions anyway; very few use any type of insurance to cover it. The same should be true for men and their Viagra, but somehow no one quibbles about that. Interesting…

Posted by: Marol Kisan | November 8, 2009, 9:33 pm 9:33 pm

Republicans, please stop calling yourself pro-life and Christian as you are neither and never have been. Many might be considered pro-fetus but once the fetus is born Republicans basically abandon the now living person. Pro-family? Name one piece of legislation the Republicans have passed that is pro-family? They are against living wage, they are against granting employee sick leave, they are against increased vacation time, they are against universal health care, they are against sound environmental laws, and they are especially against worker protections. So how did they become annointed the pro-life, pro-family party? Their track record shows a true disdain for both.
As for being Christian, I doubt Jesus would really agree with the lies and hate the spews forth from the mouths of Republican politicians, commentators, and their base. Do these people actually read the Bible or just rely on charletans to interprete it for them?The Prophets for Profit, along with the Fox New propagandists, who have prostituted themselves for fame and fortune would not find acceptance by Christ. Those fine people that form the Republican base and proclaim themselves so self-righteous would actually find Jesus praying for them instead of with them.
The Republican Party is a farce and their do-nothing, know-nothing political strategy is only quickening our destruction and our descent into 2nd or 2rd world status. Republican ignorance may be bliss to many; but it holds no future. Either have some 21st century ideas or step out of the way and let people who do govern.

Posted by: afmca | November 8, 2009, 9:37 pm 9:37 pm

i fear for the sanity and intelligence of this country with all this “government takeover!” “does the fetus-soul go back to heaven?” crazy-talk.

Posted by: mo b | November 8, 2009, 10:39 pm 10:39 pm

Ms. Brazile’s suggestion is simply outlandish, and doesn’t even deserve to be published. The Stupak amendment simply keeps abortion coverage out of the new government insurance exchange, which is a good thing. It does not outlaw abortions or abortion coverage. Those who want such coverage are free to purchase it, but without any government assistance.

Posted by: Sean | November 8, 2009, 11:09 pm 11:09 pm

WELL SAID, Stan!!! DITTO!
Funny. I don’t want my tax dollars to fund murder either so no more funding for elective procedures like drone strikes, precision bombing, and patrols in a country that will never be subdued.
Can I get that in an amendment?

Posted by: Laurie | November 8, 2009, 11:12 pm 11:12 pm

What I find most fascinating was the seating last week, to George’s Right (representing the Conservatives) was, who else? George Will, no surprise there. To George’s Left (Representing the Liberals) was who else? Cooke Roberts, no surprise there either. Directly opposite George (representing the Moderate, and Independent Voters, at least according to Mr. Stephanopoulos & ABC News) was Donna Brazille! As someone who is a registered Independent myself, does anyone else see something wrong with this picture?

Posted by: Jim Jordan | November 9, 2009, 7:50 am 7:50 am

mo b said, “i fear for the sanity and intelligence of this country with all this “government takeover!” “does the fetus-soul go back to heaven?” crazy-talk.”
Well, answer the question. Where does the soul of the fetus go. Does it have a soul?

Posted by: Cindy | November 9, 2009, 8:54 am 8:54 am

The Stupak Amendment makes it illegal for ant PRIVATE insurance company on the exchange to offer abortion services to anybody. If you are using private money, you still can’t get it covered. So this is more than just banning public money from being spent on it.
Obama has his nerve selling out women. I wish Hillary had won!

Posted by: Julie | November 9, 2009, 9:27 pm 9:27 pm

That has been the intent of the conservatives all along, and precisely why this bill as written, cannot be passed.

Posted by: Rick McDaniel | November 10, 2009, 10:21 am 10:21 am

Well-stated by Donna Brazile.

Posted by: tina | November 10, 2009, 5:06 pm 5:06 pm

Leave a Reply

Do you have more information about this topic? If so, please click here to contact the editors of ABC News.