TPM LiveWire

Women's Rights Leader: Caught Off-Guard By 'Terrible, Disastrous' Stupak Deal

Spread the word. Share this article on Facebook!

Share

Share

Twitter Facebook Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

Terry O'Neill, President of the National Organization for Women, called the Stupak abortion amendment in the House health care bill a "terrible, disastrous deal" today on MSNBC. Watch the video below.

Appearing on the show Dr. Nancy with anchor Dr. Nancy Snyderman, O'Neill said the amendment took her by surprise and that her organization -- along with other women's rights groups -- is doing everything in their power to keep it out of the final bill.

"It definitely caught me off guard," O'Neill said. "On Saturday morning, I started getting calls and emails and texts saying, you know, there's a deal that's been cut and it's a terrible, disastrous deal. The Stupak-Pitts amendment, I believe, essentially overrules Roe v. Wade."

The NOW president had the chance to make her voice heard to the Obama administration yesterday when she met with White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and health care czar Nancy-Ann DeParle.

"We are doing everything to make sure that [the Stupak amendment] does not get into the Senate bill," O'Neill said on MSNBC. "That's not a health bill -- it's not acceptable to change health care for America while sending women off into the back alley to die." Her language echoes that of Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA), who took to the House floor during Saturday's health care debate to fight the amendment: "This amendment takes us one step back to those dark days of back-alley abortions... this puts the religious views back into our politics. This is outrageous."

As for the religion involved, Dr. Nancy believes "Catholic bishops appearing and having a political voice seems to be a most fundamental violation of church and state." Catholic bishops lobbied hard for the amendment to pass. In response, O'Neill said, "I don't know where the Internal Revenue Service is, but I hope they're paying attention."

The fate of the Stupak language is unclear, as it sows anger as well as confusion on Capitol Hill. What's certain is that groups like NOW, NARAL and Planned Parenthood -- caught by surprise by this "disastrous deal" -- will be fighting against it.

Dr. Nancy ended the interview by pointing out that Bart Stupak and Henry Hyde (author of the anti-abortion Hyde Amendment) are "both white men telling women about reproduction."

Join the Conversation!

2 comments

Recommend Recommend (0)

November 12, 2009 4:55 PM   

No disrespect meant, but since progressives have been outmanuevered on this issue for the past 40 years, you can't really call it a "surprise."

My post from a few days ago, plus a pertinent comment:

Abortion Not A Moral Issue - It's a Class Issue (6+ / 0-)

Recommended by:

Odysseus, Brooke In Seattle, big annie, mchestnutjr, JC from IA, OhHai

This is one where the Democrats have gotten played for decades, and this has never made sense.

Before I was Virginia Common Sense, I lived near Philadelphia, and I am a baby boomer old enough to remember when abortion was illegal, and there were really pretty frequent headlines in the Evening Bulletin, along the lines of "Woman dies after back alley abortion", "Unidentified Woman Found Bleeding to Death," etc. These victims were almost always low income, and very frequently African American.

If you were rich enough then (late 1960s) you of course could get an abortion, but it was disguised or included as a "European vacation"-- with parents sometime saying about their daughter:
"She'll be gone for a week or back in a month." This was before the acceptance of single motherhood, and the stigma was incredible, it's hard for people today to realize how real that was.

My point is that abortions have always been available, if you were rich enough. That's what Roe v Wade made possible, it equaled the playing field so that if you could not avoid the "European vacation", you still had options. The Democratic party has allowed the GOP to turn what is a equality and class issue into a moral issue, without a peep. I'm certainly not saying that abortion should become our preferred method of birth control, they way it is in some countries, but don't cede the entire debate to being a moral one, there is an equality and class issue as well.

Regards.

by VACommonsense on Mon Nov 09, 2009 at 02:24:19 PM PST

[ Reply to This ]

* [new] VACommensense hit the nail on the head... (4+ / 0-)
Recommended by:

Odysseus, big annie, JC from IA, OhHai

I was out of college by 1960 and had two close friends who were in medical school in the late 50's and early 60's, before abortion was legal in any state. Their tales of working Saturday night shifts at Bellevue Hospital in NYC and Boston City in Boston were searing. The women brought in with botched abortions, both quantity and condition, were horrifying, evidence of medieval medicine practiced on the helpless in 20th century America. Whether Stupak knows it or not, it is medieval medicine his amendment will bring to the least among us, unless it's removed.

I'm a Pennsylvania resident so I've already written Casey and Specter about the issue. Casey, of course, has already been reported by the NY Times as considering offering a Stupak amendment for the Senate version. My family's votes, all of four, don't mean much, but I promised we'd either vote against him or sit on our hands in his next run for office, the choice depending on who his opposition is. And I promised to work for any challenger in the Democratic primary before his reelection campaign in 2012. I voted for him and contributed money in 2006. We had to get rid of Santorum, but on this bill Santorum would have been no worse.

by Kelvin Kean on Mon Nov 09, 2009 at 02:42:36 PM PST

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

November 12, 2009 5:51 PM    in reply to VACommonsense

It's not a matter of being outmaneuvered. Progressives want this very badly, but centrists/conservatives could happily walk away with nothing. That puts them in the driver's seat. If they say leave this in the bill or get nothing, then we will indeed have to decide between leaving this in or getting nothing.

Getting nothing is unacceptable. There's plenty we'll have to fix later. This becomes item one. Put something must pass first. In all likelihood, we can attach a repeal of Stupak to something centrists/conservatives want very badly but we can walk away from.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Leave a comment

Your response:

Follow us!

Most Popular

TPM Stories Now Surging on