Nelson introduces abortion amendment to Senate health bill

The Hill: "The Senate took a crucial step toward a showdown on abortion with the introduction of an amendment by Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) and nine other anti-abortion rights senators." Nelson has indicated that he will join a Republican filibuster effort "if strict abortion language is not adopted." So far, it appears unlikely that Nelson will be able to gather the 60 votes necessary for this provision to be approved. But "[b]ecause [Majority Leader Harry ] Reid needs to hold his entire 60-member Democratic caucus together on the healthcare bill in order to advance it toward passage, a defection by Nelson over abortion would force Reid to seek at least one GOP supporter."

On the list of Republican cosponsors is Sens. Orrin Hatch (Utah), Sam Brownback (Kansas), John Thune (S.D.), Tom Coburn (Okla.) Mike Johanns (Neb.), David Vitter (La.) and John Barrasso (Wyo.). Though Democratic Sen. Bob Casey Jr. (Pa.) is a co-sponsor of the Nelson amendment, "he would not block the final bill from passage if the amendment fails."

Nelson's amendment "is based on language authored by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) and attached to the House-passed healthcare reform bill" (Young, 12/7).

Politico: "The amendment is likely to be debated on the floor tomorrow. Most observers expect it to fail, which could put the future of reform in doubt as Nelson has threatened to filibuster a bill that doesn't include the provision." Politico also provides a copy of the amendment that prohibits the use of Federal funds for abortion (Frates, 12/7).

The Detroit Free Press reports that "if the abortion restrictions disappear from the merged bill - as many expect - it could hurt its long-term chances among pro-life Democrats, including Stupak, in the House. ... But critics, like Stupak and Nelson, argue that such a segregation of funds doesn't adequately stop public funds from being used for abortion coverage since the insurers are still receiving taxpayer money. Their amendment goes further, saying no plan receiving federal subsidies - nor the public option - may provide abortion coverage, except in limited cases of rape, incest or where the mother's life is in danger. Stupak says such a measure retains funding restrictions already in place" (Spangler, 12/7).

CNN: "Opponents of the tougher language say the amended language would expand the current level of restriction because women receiving coverage under a federally subsidized health care plan would be barred from purchasing abortion coverage with their own money" (12/7).

USA Today: "The Senate could vote on the measure as soon as Tuesday" (Fritze, 12/07).