Stupak on msnbc

[POAS]

In defense of his position he cites page 237 (sub E) that allows a refundable tax credit going to an exchange policy holder to subsidize the cost and that policy could include abortion coverage. He calls that a government subsidy of abortion.

He also uses page 2070 to argue that the policies MUST include abortion (corrected by the hosts that not all policies had to have that coverage) and therefore the refund would be a direct federal subsidy of abortion.

He claims the HCR overturns the Hite Amendment.

He blames the Stupak amendment on the pro-choice people for rejecting a hand shake compromise he says he agreed to previously because they demanded a vote on the floor.

When confronted by language in the bill that specifically says that to use a plan covering abortion the individual policy holder must pay for that portion of the policy out of their own pocket (my paraphrase) he continues to argue it is still Federal dollars being used.

Cries that he is getting cussed out everywhere he goes and his wife is getting harassed at home, shameful if true.

I thought the hosts did a good job of countering his assertions, now off I go to read those pages to see how he distorted their meaning.

Edited to add, forgive the seeming stream of consciousness of this post as I was typing as the interview progressed.

[Cha]

1. Thank for your effort on

getting down what stupak is using as his complaints.

Everyone says he's wrong and yet he's still trying to rationalize it.

Poor bart..now he's the victim. Not sure I'm buying that since he hasn't been a stand up guy over the language in the HRC.

Here's a link to an article on stupak by Steve Benen

<snip>

"ABC News did a nice job fact-checking Stupak's argument this week, and Slate's Tim Noah (a Monthly alum) published the definitive takedown a couple of days ago, explaining that some areas of the debate are open to interpretation and debate, but this isn't one of them: "Stupak happens to be wrong."

Usually, this would be enough. Democratic leaders would explain the truth to Stupak and his allies, making the case on the merits -- the Senate compromise language, endorsed by center-right Dems who oppose abortion rights, already does what Stupak & Co. want, which is to prevent public funding of abortion.

But Stupak has been reluctant to listen to reason, and continues to make claims that simply fail to stand up to scrutiny. The new goal is to strike a related deal that would address Stupak's concerns in a separate-but-connected bill. That may or may not be enough.

"In the meantime, though, it's worth re-emphasizing reality -- Stupak's argument is factually in error. That will make negotiations with him more complicated -- lawmakers who stick to a mistake after it's been exposed as a mistake can be challenging to deal with -- but that's where we find ourselves."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=388x17712

[sandnsea]

2. I think this is the Senate compromise

Women's groups are still arguing that insurance companies will stop providing abortion coverage if people have to write a separate check for it. People write separate checks for riders all the time, I don't know why they'd have such a hard time doing it for their insurance. I think this is a good compromise, I don't know why they all keep insisting on having everything 100% of their own way.