Obama to Sign Promised Executive Order on Abortion

[midnight]

Source: A.P.

WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama plans to sign an executive order Wednesday reaffirming long-standing restrictions on federal funding of the procedure.

The order is part of an agreement with Democratic abortion opponents in the House that brought them over to Obama's side and pushed the health care bill over the top.

Obama has invited members of the Democrats' anti-abortion bloc, including its leader, Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan, to the private afternoon signing at the White House.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/24/obama-sign-promised-executive-order-abortion/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+foxnews%2Fpolitics+%28Text+-+Politics%29

[xchrom]

1. Recommend

[No Elephants]

2. Puke (but I recommended, for importance).

[Ilsa]

3. I wonder if this private gathering will include any women.

Geez, I wonder what these alpha males would do if only women were legislating and signing off on restrictions affecting their healthcare?

[DFLforever]

33. It should include Marcy Kaptur

She's one of the harder core pro-life Dems and one of the Stupak finalists.

[jody]

4. What act by congress will he use to justify the executive order? n/t

[midnight]

43. What act by congress?

Can you say Bart Stupak?

[marshall]

5. He better sign it with a pencil

Cause it's going to need to be erased.

[depakid]

12. Nope- thus far he's proven quite reliable with his promises to the far right

it's traditional Democratic constituencies that need to be watching their backs....

[mr1956]

6. Fox News? Really?

[midnight]

8. Actually I scooped this from political wire that linked the full story to fox link.

http://politicalwire.com/aggregator/ However, the fact is that this is being reported. To some, no matter where it is coming from, it is not good news....

[niceypoo]

7. Republicans get everything they want

...in the name of ´bipartisanship´.

Sigh..

[proReality]

9. Isn't it strange...

...that those who want government OUT of our health care are the same ones who want government CONTROLLING OUR UTERUS'S?!!!

Guess next time I need a pap smear I'll make an appointment with my district representative or state's senator.

[glitch]

20. That's a good idea for a calling campaign.

Not just government either, call in to radio and tv (like cspan).

PS, great username.

[midnight]

44. True.

[optimator]

10. no way to rationalize Obama's discrimination against women

I doubt these women haters would ban federal funding for prostate procedures.

[midnight]

11. I did have to wonder what would happen if viagra wasn't covered?

[OnlinePoker]

32. Don't know about the States...

...but in B.C., PSA tests aren't covered by medical yet mammograms and abortions are. Prostate cancer kills nearly the same number of men in B.C. as Breast cancer and yet this diagnostic tool is not provided free of charge.

[Sgent]

35. PSA

is essentially useless in asymptomatic men for screening purposes.

[Ter]

36. You're comparing prostate problems to abortion?

Come on now.

[LynneSin]

13. I'd almost be upset about this except it's something already in place

and a nice lil boner he tossed to those who supported his plan and are anti-choice.

Nothing has changed whatsoever.

[EFerrari]

15. You might want to scan truedelphi's thread on the damage done by this EO.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7989207&mesg_id=7989207

[LynneSin]

17. This isn't something brand new

This is basically saying that there is nothing in the Healthcare Bill that changes what was passed about a decade ago.

And to be honest, I would rather not have anything related to abortion in the healthcare bill. We all knew this was a difficult juggernaut to pass, I would rather we fight these battles either as their own bill or better yet - thru our court systems.

[EFerrari]

18. Hyde has to be renewed every year, actually. Here's a little more from The Nation

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8004901

[mvd]

19. Lynne, that doesn't make it somehow right IMO

I hope Obama absolutely had to do it for the bill to pass, because it has the force of law and may make things harder to undo.

[LynneSin]

26. there are times to fight this battle and this wasn't one of them

This doesn't meant I'm somehow anti-choice. This just wasn't the place to fight the battle - we'll have better opportunities for success elsewhere.

[mvd]

28. I don't know that I would have given in for Stupak

Though I'm not a big fan of the bill (now law) to begin with.

[mvd]

29. On the other hand, Lynne could be right

I have said here how despite my reservations, I thought the bill had to pass. If there was anything I could have done to avoid more anti-choice language, I wouldn't have put it in. But I have no idea how the votes and circumstances were. Now, for the rest of the year, the President will likely focus on the economy and jobs - but more health reform can now come sooner than it would have if nothing passed IMO.

[LynneSin]

34. The only thing we need congress to do is get us better judges

and keep bad ones off the bench.

Because at this point the matter of choice is beyond legislation and will only be solved thru litigation.

But honestly, we need to find better alternatives to abortion and focus on making those much more accessible. Whatever happened to RU-486. Could you imagine if all the doctor has to do is prescribe something and be done. And personally I wish it was something to doctor could give directly, because the abortion foes are trying to get pharmacists in on the battle.

[EFerrari]

46. By not fighting this battle now, we gave up ground.

That's simply a fact. It will be harder for women to access abortion.

It's not true that this doesn't change anything. And it's not true that this won't have consequences to abortion access. At least, let's be real about what we're doing.

[midnight]

42. Thanks Eferrari. A very important consideration that chills me with the damage

that can happen....

[AlphaCentauri]

21. It won't change anything

just no body is going to get it for free if they are going to have an abortion by choice

[EFerrari]

47. It does makes it more difficult for a woman to access abortion

because as another DUer pointed out, there is now a whole new class of funding. More hoops and now Hyde re-enforced by this EO.

Yes, it's a step backward for abortion access.

[BlueIris]

45. Still doesn't make Obama's validation of anti-choice law acceptable.

Ugly.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

14. So, we can spend BILLIONS --

bombing the crap out of innocent people, pissing it away on larcenous "private contracters", throwing it by the handful at the Wall Street Masters, working to overthrow duly elected leftist officials in our hemisphere, but god fucking forbid we spend a single DIME helping a poor woman get a legal medical procedure. :crazy: :puke: :mad:

Thanks, O, for helping keep women under the bus for a lousy photo op to help keep anti-choicers baby fetish cred all shiney.

[defendandprotect]

23. MIC is obviously "pro-life" . . .. ahem . . . and, btw . . .

Can we get some men interested here in switching Father's Day to an

anti-war day? That was the basis of Mother's Day, as well, and we need

to get back to it!

[Ter]

37. A lot of "legal medical procedures" aren't covered

Why no breast implants or sex changes? Why no hair transplants?

[hamsterjill]

16. "Democratic abortion opponents"

Gosh, those words used to be a contradiction.

What has happened to my party?

[glitch]

22. The Republicans self-destructed, and in a two-party system they had nowhere else to go. nt

[Hell Hath No Fury]

27. They were ASKED in --

By Dems like Rahm Emmanuel. Never forget that.

[glitch]

30. Trust me when I tell you that I will =never= forget that. I will also never forget who hired him. nt

[hamsterjill]

31. Understood. And "they'd" best not forget

That choice is one of the reasons why *I* call myself a Democrat. It is not a right that *I* feel could/should be negotiated away. It is an issue of major importance with me.

[Thothmes]

40. The big tent

[seafan]

24. RE Signing the Executive Order: '...the event Wednesday will be closed to the news media.'

Why are they hiding this from the public?


This Executive Order, after all, is the eleventh-hour reason this health insurance reform legislation passed.

(CNN) -- President Obama will sign an executive order Wednesday that ensures that existing limits on the federal funding of abortion remain in place under the new health care overhaul law.

Unlike the signing of the health care bill into law Tuesday, which was conducted under the glare of media cameras, the event Wednesday will be closed to the news media.

It will be attended by Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan and 12 of his anti-abortion Democratic House colleagues, without whose help the landmark overhaul bill would not have passed, political observers say.

.....

Wonder how many women will be attending this little private gathering...



More discussion in this thread.

[Melusine]

25. Is it time to cheer yet?

It's so hard to tell from down here under the bus.

:mad:

[jmowreader]

38. I actually like this, and I'm pro-choice

By signing an Executive Order maintaining the status quo on abortion, the President just FUCKED every single Republican who was absolutely, 100 percent CERTAIN the healthcare reform law was going to force them to pay for abortions through their tax dollars. Now the whole country can see just how unbelievably stupid those people were, and remain.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

39. I like this perspective

helpful to me! It's easy to get caught up in freaking out.

[WeekendWarrior]

41. BINGO.

And he did it BY NOT CHANGING A THING ABOUT THE CURRENT LAW.

[Odin2005]

48. If you like this you are NOT pro-choice.

No federal funding for abortions = poor women get screwed.

[jmowreader]

49. Call me a realist, okay?

Let's throw another scenario out there: we put federal funding for abortions into the HCR bill. Obviously it SHOULD be in there because, as you say, without it poor women are screwed. The results would be:

1. There would be no way the bill would pass with it in there. Way too many people, even people who think abortion should be legal, think the government should not fund abortion on demand. (Medicaid currently mandates abortion funding in cases of rape, incest, and the endangerment of the woman's life. Add "endanger's the woman's health" and it would be perfect. So, in reality, there is SOME federal abortion funding for poor women and nothing in the HCR bill alters that.) One of two things would have happened if it would have been put in there: it would have been stripped out at the first reading of the bill, or the whole bill would have been tabled.

2. The Religious Right would have used the one-time presence of abortion funding in the bill as a tool to help remove Democrats from Congress in November. Given a new majority, the Republicans would have generated even more restrictions on abortion. President Obama would have signed those bills in the spirit of bipartisanship.

3. The Religious Right would then have used the one-time presence of abortion funding in the bill as a tool to remove President Obama from office in 2012. They'll run a serious anti-abortion person who runs on a platform containing two planks: tax cuts and the need to insert an anti-abortion amendment to the Constitution.

4. With the support of the anti-abortion minority in America, this "sanctity of life" amendment would ban abortion for any reason whatsoever.

Given the choice of a Status Quo-maintaining executive order that makes the Republicans look like damn fools, or ultimately an environment where abortion even to protect the life of the mother is banned (and some anti-abortion people are so extreme they have come out and said there's no such thing as a medical condition that warrants abortion, which is a huge lie but they're sticking with it) I'll stand with the status quo.