Stupak Amendment Takes Toll on Massachusetts Senate Race
The controversial Stupak amendment is wreaking unexpected havoc on the U.S. Senate race in Massachusetts to replace the late Sen. Ted Kennedy.
With less than a month before the December 8th primaries, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi took the unusual (quid pro quo?) step of endorsing one Democratic candidate over three others: longshot Rep. Michael Capuano, who Pelosi called "courageous" for his crucial vote last weekend to support the House health care reform bill. Pelosi observed:
"Any one of us could have found one reason or another not to vote for the bill. But that was not an excuse for preventing this historic moment from taking place..."He's not ideological; He's operational. He's there to get the job done for the American people."
Per the Suffolk poll taken from Nov 4-8, 2009, the leading Democratic contender remains Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley with a whopping 44% of likely Democratic voters. Six-term Rep. Capuano draws third place in the poll with 16% of likely voters, just behind Boston Celtics co-owner Stephen G. Pagliuca with a 17% estimated share. Support for Coakley has faded slightly, though, from her earlier large lead of close to 50% over other Democratic contenders.
In contrast to Rep. Capuano, A.G. Coakley unequivocally stated that as a U.S. senator, she would not vote for health care reform legislation that contained Stupak amendment-like restrictions on abortion rights. Commented Coakley to Boston radio station WTKK-FM, "To pretend that now the House has passed this bill is real progress - it's at the expense of women's access to reproductive rights."
While all four Democratic candidates in the Bay State profess to be pro-choice, Martha Coakley, who was a diehard Clinton supporter in the 2008 presidential race, WAS the only one who declared intentions to vote against health care reform if the Stupak amendment is not stripped from the legislation.
Was... until Rep. Capuano backtracked, commenting, "If the bill comes back the same way as it left the House, I would vote against it. I am a pro-choice person, and I do believe this is [necessary] to provide health care for everyone."
To which A.G. Coakley dryly replied, "We are heartened to see that Congressman Capuano has reversed his position to follow Martha Coakley's lead, and no longer will vote for health care legislation that further restricts a woman's right to choose."
Intra-party fireworks in Massachusetts are guaranteed in the weeks ahead between now and the December 8th primary. Check back here for the latest on this and all 2010 Senate races.
And mark my words: this is only the first of many 2010 Congressional races to be impacted by the Stupak amendment, which you can read in full here: Full Text of Stupak Amendment to Prohibit Government-Funded Abortions
- Essential Reading
- Profile of Martha Coakley, Senate Candidate from MA
- 2010 U.S. Senate Races - Who's Winning, Who's Not
- Pro-Choice Advocates Are Wrong to Block House Health Care Bill
(Photo taken in 2005 of Congressman Capuano with Army soldiers and Marines stationed at Camp Al Asad, located in Al Anbar Province, Iraq. Photo Courtesy of the Office of Congressman Capuano.)
Comments
**Sigh…**
Maybe rational thinking isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.
I put up a post at Newshoggers citing our discussion here and it seems to be sinking like a rock.
Moderate, reasonable positions are just boring. I noticed two or three moderate comments at the Hill link.
Why say “pro-abortion rights crowd” instead of pro-choice? Why say “a provision restricting federal funding for abortion” instead of a provision restricting federal and private funding for abortion? …pro abortion and pro choice are different. pro choice- the right to chose even if you dont believe in abourtion … prochoice dont mean pro abourtion, it means the right to chose, i am prochoice yet i do not approve of abortion, but i do feel its a womans choice and would never judge someone who wants one. learn the difference…Aaron these people are pro-choice not pro-abortion. You dumb down your argument when intentionally choose to label them this way…
And MA has sent the faithfully Roman Catholic Kennedy clan to Washington for decades, despite (or maybe because of) their clear pro-choice positions, contrary to Catholic political leanings.
Go figure.
The ghost of Francis Schaeffer is laughing. He really did a number on evangelical Christians.
Martha Coakley is the kind of Senator we need. Please help assure we get our 18th women and most qualified candidate to fill Ted Kennedy’s seat in the Senate. Martha will be the first woman from Massachusetts in it’s 221 year history.
Donate: http://www.actblue.com/page/mc2010
Learn more:
grassroots: http://www.womenforcoakley.com
campaign: http://www.marthacoakley.com
Help make history!
I wonder if most traditional insurance plans cover abortion. As a teenager and in my 20s I knew a few people who had abortions or helped pay for their girlfriends’ to have abortions. Not that I agreed with their decision but I would never condemn them for it either. Most of those people had health insurance. It was my understanding that a voluntary abortion as a pure means of birth control was not covered by their insurance. But maybe I am wrong.
It’s crazy how divided this country becomes over any single issue. That’s where it would make more sense if someday we throw out representative government and let the people vote for the issues rather than for people. That’s where referendums make sense. Direct democracy is the only true fair way to govern. As a moderate, free thinker, and a person who questions everything, it is virtually impossible to agree 100% on all issues with any other person let alone a mob of people we define as a political party.
Watch what is going to happen, the democrats will start tearing up their own party over abortion. I guess they are not paying attention to what happened to the GOP in NY recently.
These politicians just never learn. But I guess learning constitutes having a functional brain.
William –
“I wonder if most traditional insurance plans cover abortion.”
Most do. the RNC plan, until this month, covered abortions. However, there aren’t that many claims for abortion. As I understand it, the cost is under $1000. I suspect that most women that have abortions never make an insurance claim. I believe that, with a little thought, you would understand the reason.
Thanks for the information. I will not vote for either of them if they intend to block health care reform. I am absolutely pro-choice, but I am also pro-reality. We need health care reform. Time to check out the other candidates.