Blogs and Stories
Un-Pelosi: The Senator Who’ll Kill the Stupak Amendment
Kena Betancur / AP Photo
As the health care bill moves into its final negotiations, freshman New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand tells the Daily Beast why the notorious anti-abortion Stupak amendment will be defeated—and how she’s helping bring it down.
In an interview with the Daily Beast on November 19, Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York expressed confidence that the Stupak amendment would not appear in a final congressional health-care reform bill. The measure, added to the House heath-care bill by Michigan Democratic Rep. Bart Stupak, would have banned any insurance plan in the health-care exchange from offering abortion coverage to any woman receiving government subsidies. But the measure does not appear in the Senate version of the bill, a move Gillibrand attributed to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.
“I’m going to do everything I can, I’m going to work as hard as I can, to make sure [Stupak’s] not in there,” says Sen. Gillibrand. “And I’m optimistic that it won’t be.”
“It shows great leadership on Harry Reid’s part that he put in a provision that maintains the status quo and ensures that Stupak won’t be in there,” Gillibrand told me. “And I am confident we have 60 votes to get the bill through.”
Under pressure from Gillibrand and pro-abortion-rights groups, Reid introduced a measure to preserve the Hyde amendment, which blocks federal funding for abortion, while preventing Stupak’s amendment from expanding restrictions. Sixty votes are required in order to proceed with a health-care reform bill with Reid’s provision intact. Now that the two most anti-abortion Democrats in the Senate, Bob Casey and Ben Nelson, have backed off their initial demand for a version of Stupak’s measure in the Senate’s health-care bill, Reid’s provision seems like a lock.
Gillibrand is confident that any Republican attempt to re-insert Stupak (Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah is expected to lead the initiative) will be soundly defeated. In order to restore the anti-abortion measure, another 60 votes would be required. In the Democratic-controlled chamber, that is considered a near-impossibility. “If Hatch intends to fight to get more discriminatory language like Stupak into the bill, we’ll have the votes to stop it, because we’ll be playing defense at that point,” said Gillibrand’s press secretary, Matt Canter.
Gillibrand’s work against the Stupak amendment marked one of her most public initiatives since she was appointed this year to fill the seat held by Hillary Clinton, who left the Senate to become secretary of State. Flanked by feminist icon Gloria Steinem, Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards and a “who’s who” of reproductive-rights advocates at a November 16 press conference, Gillibrand delivered an impassioned denunciation of the amendment, warning that its passage “would put the health of millions of women and girls at grave risk.” Soon after the press conference, liberal advocacy groups NARAL and People for the American Way delivered an anti-Stupak petition with nearly 100,000 signatures to Reid’s office.
• Amy Siskind: Nancy Pelosi, Feminist NightmareWhen Gillibrand was first named as Clinton’s replacement, her views on hot-button issues like immigration stirred deep concern among national progressives and liberal New York Democrats. But as soon as she moved from her rural Republican-heavy congressional district to the Senate, Gillibrand pivoted to the left. Her leading role in stripping the Stupak amendment has helped reassure the Democratic base of her progressive credentials. With residual support from independent voters from her former district and enthusiasm from liberal activists, Gillibrand is becoming a formidable candidate for the campaign next year to retain her seat.
How Rich People Smoke Pot
Paul Schrodt is a writer living in New York City. He has contributed to New York magazine, Radar, and Esquire.com.
Justice Clinton?
As vice chairman of Public Strategies and president of Maverick Media, Mark McKinnon has helped meet strategic challenges for candidates, corporations and causes, including George W. Bush, John McCain, Governor Ann Richards, Charlie Wilson, Lance Armstrong, and Bono. McKinnon is co-chair of Arts & Labs, a collaboration between technology and creative communities that have embraced today's rich Internet environment to deliver innovative and creative digital products to consumers.
The War on Christmas Peters Out
Max Blumenthal is a senior writer for The Daily Beast, writing fellow at The Nation Institute and author of Republican Gomorrah (Basic/Nation Books). Contact him at maxblumenthal3000@yahoo.com.
Palin's Wing-Nut Rival
Max Blumenthal is a senior writer for The Daily Beast, writing fellow at The Nation Institute and author of Republican Gomorrah (Basic/Nation Books). Contact him at maxblumenthal3000@yahoo.com.
Palin's Noxious Ghostwriter
Max Blumenthal is a senior writer for The Daily Beast, writing fellow at The Nation Institute and author of Republican Gomorrah (Basic/Nation Books). Contact him at maxblumenthal3000@yahoo.com.
crypto
I'll swear I don't understand these politicians. She's fighting for abortion and the women are losing their mammogram and pap smear care. What is wrong with these people.
bhavanibbana
Really? Revised guidelines for cancer screenings is equivalent to women losing care? Really?
These guidelines were not even endorsed by the AMA. Plus, most doctors and women will ignore this guidelines. Even the HHS secretary said that women should continue doing what they've been doing.
Educate yourself, friend.
newswoman
Yes, but when some authority says no screenings at 40, you know that the insurance companies will use that as an excuse not to pay!! You educate yourself, Bhavanibbana.
Monk66
secondly, she, nor the senate, has any control over that. That was the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
Has all that spinning ever made you dizzy crypto?
newswoman
These pols don't care about women's issues! They could care less about abortion, but it is a vote getter for some so they oppose it sanctimoniously. Now someone wants to oppose women getting mammograms at 30 or 40 when we know MANY women get cancer at that age. Mrs. Phil Mikelson, for one (sh'e is her 30's). Men pols, stay out of our lives!! We will decide these things, not you.
Natural-Selection
Newswoman, this is what will happen when the government takes over healthcare. They will set the mandate that everyone will have to live by. Nothing is free and when we have to insure millions that don't pay an equitable amount of taxes....this is the reaction and result of the action. You lose women's health issues so people that don't pay taxes can run to the doctor every time they have a runny nose.
This is dumb!
hithere3
you have a right to get mammograms and abortions at any age you wish, and as often as you like.
what you DON'T have a right to is getting all of those tests and procedures paid for by tax payers.
Natural-Selection
This week is your preview of government run healthcare. A panel with no Oncologists on it, just randomly decides what's best for women when it comes to breast health?
Don't even do self exams? My mom found a lump that way and she was saved....they are morons and the majority of the people on this site want this for themselves and everyone else....wake up folks!!
OldCrow
She's a puppet of the liberal left and owes her career to Schumer.
She will say what ever they tell her.
AnnieG
Owes her career to Schumer? What evidence do you have of that statement? As far as I know, since becoming a senator, she has gone more to the left than Schumer ever has and as far as I'm concerned, has done a whole lot more on social issues that are of great importance (abortion; Don't Ask, Don't Tell) than Schumer ever has. I was hesitant about her at first, but I'm a gung-ho Gillibrand supporter at this point.
Genni2002
Great job! Need to get all women related healthcare included.
Strange, albeit important as separate issues regarding the blatant minimization of women's health issues in general by the male dominated medical establishment, to bring up the mammogram and pap smear issue when obviously a woman's health goes out the window when she becomes pregnant.
crypto
My wife was thirty eight when they discovered, by early detection thank goodness, breast cancer. Now they want to wait until you're fifty, and then every two years??? Who the hell are these people???
Monk66
I will concede from my reply above that the mammongram issue is gov't funded. However, it the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force is made up of doctors from all fields. This link is their website, which shows who makes up the group and mission statement ect.
http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/uspstfab.htm
I am sorry to read about your wife. Good luck with the fight.
crypto
Oh she's fine now and thanks for the thought. But if not for the mammogram she wouldn't have been. bhavanibbana says 1 out of 1900 returned positive results. But that one does have problems now doesn't she. Raise all the hell you want to but I believe this is nothing more than a feeler for what's to come.
bhavanibbana
You would do well to read the details of the study before going into hysterics. It was found that 1 out of 1900 women under 50 returned positive tests. The conclusion drawn was that the benefits of testing don't outweigh the risks. That is not a directive to forgo testing until age 50.
Genni2002
Can't get if you are against choice or just pro mammogram? Cryptic crypto.
crypto
Choice is just that. But I gotta say this. If a woman throws a newborn in the dumpster that's manslaughter at the very least under this legal system. But if a doctor just pulls the baby's head off before final birth that's abortion and it's ok. One of those things is wrong. Who decides.
iamone3
Crypto, I`m with you man . And on top of those women that want to kill their unborn child (no it is not a cucumber girls), they want the rest of us to pay for it.Keep up the good work Crypto.
AnnieG
Who decides? Why should the government, or anyone else for that matter, decide what is right for each woman given their specific case and circumstance. As far as I'm concerned, I think everyone, men and women, should have the right to decide what they do with their bodies, whether that is deciding to have a mammogram at 35 or 50 or to terminate an unwanted pregnancy. Whatever happened to doctor/patient confidentiality and respect for peoples' choices they make with regards to their own bodies.
ThinkAgain
Ah the liberal libbers -- defending a womans right to have us all pay so they can afford to be reckless and irresponsible with their bodies.
Monk66
yeah because mammograms and pap smears have anything to do with being reckless and irresponsable with their bodies.
Think Again.
newswoman
What a nasty remark, Thinkagain. What makes you think getting cancer is being "irresponsible with our bodies". Maybe we shouldn't pay for prostate surgeries when men are so 'irresponsible with their bodies'. See how ignorant that sounds, you dweeb.
larry278
ThinkAgain has never been capable of thinking. He/she/it feels that any woman who becomes ill is being punised by a diety for offending him/her/it. ThinkAgain sounds like a Christer of the religious(?) right, wingnut, fundie, neo-con persuasion. See to it that ThinkAgain gets to every National Prayer Breakfast & all other Fellowship run events for free. He/she/it will see that he/she/it is among the earth's largest group of bat shit crazy bigots. The rest of us have known that for ages.
Some creatures are not quick witted. Think of Think Again, as 1 of the worst examples of the bien pensants who constantly bither the CW of 200 years ago used by what are now called born again Christians. aka Christers, Copulating Christians, Jucking Fesus Freaks, Fundies, etc. When creatures of this ilk say that they will pray for you, it means that you won't let them prey upon you or humankind. That flusters & frustrates Christers so much that they start foaming at the mouth & babbling word salad, aka speaking in tongues.
Muzzle them when they show these symptums(sic?). The authorities in haz-mat suits must be called to collect & cage them so they can't wander at large to harm any sentient being. The cages will be taken to a super max treatment facility where they will receive humane care & be screened to see if they are capable of responding to current methods of psychotherapy. Rest assured that these creatures who are of the Christer/fundie persuasion will never be harmed. They will always get the state of the art in humane care. Fundies, despite their strange acts, are human beings. They must get humane care at all times. The adage, "1st do no harm.", must govern any therapy being considered for any individual who has the symptoms of being a fundie. That also mean that all of them must have clean clothes 24/7, adequate, wholesome food, clean beds & sleeping quarters, state of the art HVAC facilities at all times. These creatures will always be human beings, regardless of the symptoms that they display.
crngndmhm
I believe ThinkAgain was refering to abortions. So obviously anyone who has an abortion is being reckless and irresponsible with their bodies. Heavy night of partying? Just go get that baby aborted. Too many gang bangs and swingers parties, don't worry just go get an abortion.
Sorry but for most people getting an abortion is one of the most hard things they'll end up doing in their lives. They don't take these decisions lightly and you treating these decisions like their just another form of birht control shows how little you actually think about these women.
hithere3
I shocked men like you still exist. I feel sorry for your wife.
AlanD2
There are a lot of women that think just like ThinkAgain, hithere3.
Pretty sad...
AlanD2
ThinkAgain: Existing birth control measures have a failure rate of anywhere from 1% (the pill) to 15% (condoms) to flip a coin (rhythm).
So many married women with children who are trying to avoid having more children get pregnant despite taking precautions and using birth control.
Where is your concern for these responsible women?
moderate001
It really amazes me how many people who spend so much of their time reading about politics are so clueless about how politics works. Stupak was a dead in the senate from the get-go and Pelosi knew it - so it was easy, and required no sacrifice of conscience to put it in the house bill.
And to those who are using this post to comment on the mamogram/ cervical screening flap is "much ado about nothing" in the extreme. Women's groups have been shouting for years that scare tactics have been used to force them into unneccessary screenings. How come when they announced earlier this year that men should slow down on the prostate exams, no one batted an eye. Doctors will still do what they think is best based on their experience and these guidelines won't affect them. The radiologists and labs that perform billions of dollars worth of unnecessary screenings will be hurt - maybe now the exhorbitant and unrealistic cost of these tests will finally come down. My life was saved by a random screening - a routine ct scan of my liver (I got Hep C from a blood transfusion in the 70's) exposed a rare kidney cancer on the other side of my body. My dad has prostate cancer, and his brother died from colon cancer, so I get prostate screening annually and and a colonoscopy every five years since I turned 40. But when my doctor suddenly said "slow down on the screenings", I, as an educated and informed consumer, had a choice. I have not had a DRE or PSA for prostate cancer in 3 years, and I'm high risk. But I do continue to get annual ct scans for my kidneys, even though I've been cancer free for 9 years. None of this is the result of any guidelines - it's a well discussed choice made with the advice of my personal physician.
rapierwits
two sane comments in a row?
am I on the right site?
morris1030
No abortions? What happened to Roe vs Wade and our constitutional right to equal protection?
It took the Democratic party to destroy the lives of millions of women? I voted for Obama, but if the Stupak goes through, I can bet you that Obama is through.
This is evil. Mamograms? At 79, [I am 83] I had a mamogram [the second of that yr], and in 9/05 I subsequently had an MRI that was validated by a surgical biopsy, and found I had TWO cancerous leisions in my left breast. This was early detection, as I was stage1. After mastectomy, I remain cancer free, thanks to a mammogram and MRI. BTW, nothing could be felt in my breast. This was early stage, and had if I had to wait 2 years, one can only imagine the size of these tumors.
Something is awfully wrong about our information regarding healthcare and breast and prostate cancer. Now all of women's right to choose are being threatened by Stupak. A Democrat no lesss. Where was Pelosi, and has she lost her mind, or is it her Catholic background that allowed this travesty to happen?
There will be an uprising from women that will crush this Admnistration unless Stupak is defeated.
hithere3
i don't think you understand what "equal protection" means.
FatFreddy
Natural-Selection is kind of on the right track, although I don't agree with the "frivolous doctor's office visits" at all.
When government gets too involved in healthcare, you get assholes on the Right telling people they can't have abortions, stem cell therapy or possibly even birth control, AND you get assholes on the Left telling people they can't eat red meat, trans fat or smoke cigarettes. Fuck 'em all.
AngelaM
Here are the statistics. 1 in 3 women will have or has had an abortion in her lifetime. Those are your mothers, sisters, daughters, wives and girlfriends. When abortion is legal they can be safely done in a medical setting, when it is illegal they will be done wherever someone is willing to do them. If you have money, there will be doctors who will accommodate you. If you don't, there's the kitchen table and the coat hanger and various other household instruments. There will be abortions, it's just a question of how safe they will be. This is a man's world. They will cover viagra and other ED medications, vasectomies, prostrate cancer screening and various other procedures vital to mens health. The women, as usual, get shafted. There's nothing new here. And the fight about abortion has never been about the unborn child, it has always been about men controlling women's bodies. Otherwise the vast majority of abortion opponents would not be men, who really have no skin in that game.
AlanD2
This won't last forever, Angela. The male-domination of Congress cannot last much longer (those old white guys are eventually going to die). And as we saw in 2008, women now have a good shot at the highest political offices in America.
But we have to keep on fighting - especially against Christian conservatives. The current power structure will not disappear quietly.
whipmawhopma
The more I hear about Gillibrand the more I like it that she's in Senate, whether or not I agree with her on each cause she is involved in.
OldCrow
Silly Gilly (as she is known in NY) is just a puppet of the liberal left.
No one listens to her and she will be voted out of office in the next election.
Just another liberal whose soul is for hire.
AnnieG
And who do you think will replace her, OldCrow, if she is in fact voted out of office? I would assume "just another liberal..."
Perhaps New York is not the state for you if that's the way you feel...
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.