Line in the sand

WASHINGTON-The Senate voted Tuesday to reject a bipartisan amendment restricting abortion services in the proposed healthcare legislation. The 54 to 45 defeat marked a reversal for pro-life supporters from the victory enjoyed in the House last month on a similar measure.

The amendment, offered by Sens. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., and Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, would have prohibited federal dollars from being used for abortions in any government-run insurance plan. It also prevented individuals receiving tax credits to buy private insurance from using those federal funds to purchase a plan that covers abortion.

"The Senate healthcare bill, if enacted, would indeed chart new ground-it covers abortion," explained Nelson during a Senate floor speech. "The language in the bill goes around the federal standard disallowing public funding of abortion. I believe that the current healthcare reform we are debating should not be used to open a new avenue for public funding of abortion."

A similar measure passed in the House version of healthcare reform last month. That vote occurred only after reform advocates concluded that a sizeable block of pro-life Democrats jeopardized final passage of the House healthcare legislation.

But in the Senate, bipartisan support for the measure is not as strong. The bill gained just one other Democratic sponsor: Bob Casey of Pennsylvania. Still the introduction of the amendment forced senators to engage in a rare floor debate on abortion. Opponents of the amendment said it takes away a women's right to make personal decisions.

Nelson, however, said his effort merely extends to the new healthcare landscape a ban on public funding of abortions that has been in place since 1976.

The National Right to Life Committee sent a letter to senators this week warning that those opposing Nelson's amendment could face repercussions in future elections.

"If you do not wish to go on record in support of creating major new federal programs that will fund abortions and subsidize private abortion coverage, please vote for the Nelson-Hatch Amendment," the letter states.

Nelson has threatened to block the entire healthcare bill if it does not include stronger abortion restrictions.

"I don't ordinarily draw a line in the sand, but I have drawn a line in the sand," Nelson told reporters.

The abortion debate has pitted not only political parties but also religious groups against one another. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has thrown its weight behind Nelson's amendment. Meanwhile, the Episcopal Church, Presbyterian Church (USA), United Church of Christ, and United Methodist Church joined in a letter this week asking senators to oppose Nelson's amendment.

But Hatch, the Republican sponsor of the amendment, took to the Senate floor before the vote and cited polls that show nearly 70 percent of Americans oppose using federal funds to pay for abortion.

"When is Congress going to start listening to the American people?" asked Hatch, who also noted that the amendment provides needed conscious protections to medical professionals who do not want to perform abortions.

If Nelson holds firm in his pledge to oppose the overall healthcare bill without his amendment, then Senate Majority Harry Reid will need to recruit at least one Republican in order to secure the 60 votes needed for final passage. This could likely come from one of the two Maine Republican senators-Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins-who will not see abortion as a deal breaker.

If the Senate passes a final bill, the healthcare abortion debate would move to the reconciliation process between the Senate and House versions of reform.

Lawmakers from both chambers would have to meet to meld the two versions together. This could get tricky with one bill containing abortion restrictions and the other allowing the public finding of abortion.

If lawmakers decide to keep language expanding abortion coverage, then as many as 40 pro-life House Democrats could remove their support. If lawmakers keep the House-approved abortion restrictions, then pro-abortions senators could balk.

Ironically a bill about health continues to have at its epicenter the debate over a procedure that ends a life.