Posts Tagged ‘Bart Stupak’

House Pro-Choice Caucus Pushing To Remove Abortion Amendment

Monday, November 9th, 2009

By Travis Martinez – University of New Mexico/Talk Radio News Service

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) along with members of the Pro-Choice Caucus will push to remove the Stupak-Pitts amendment, which would block federal funds to support partial term abortions, from the Affordable Health Care For America Act 2009.

“We will try very hard to make sure it is not included in the final product,” Wasserman Shultz said in a conference call Monday. “I’m going to be pushing extremely hard to make sure that language is not included.”

The Florida Democrat also rebuked comments made by Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas), who on Friday stated that women should pay higher health premiums due to the possibility that they could become pregnant.

“I’ve never seen a more disrespectful display,” Wasserman-Shultz said. “At one point in the debate, [Sessions] actually compared women to smokers and suggested women, like smokers, should have to pay more for insurance, just by the accident for their ability to get pregnant.”

House Adopts Stupak Amendment

Saturday, November 7th, 2009

The House voted Saturday to adopt an amendment to the Affordable Health Care for America Act providing the language to bar federal subsidies for insurance plans that cover abortions.

The amendment, which was introduced by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), was approved by 240-194, with 176 Republicans voting yay coupled with 64 additional votes in favor from Democrats.

There were no nay votes from Republicans, but one GOP member did vote present. 194 Democrats opposed the amendment.

Pelosi: Amendment Clarifying Abortion Funding May Not Make It Into Health Care Bill

Thursday, November 5th, 2009

By Leah Valencia, University of New Mexico- Talk Radio News Service

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Thursday that the decision has not been made over whether lawmakers will be allowed to offer amendments to the Affordable Health Care for All Americans Act once it reaches chamber floor, including any amendment pertaining to abortion.

“We may not have any amendments,” Pelosi said during her weekly press conference.

Rep. Brad Ellsworth (D-Ind.) and Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) along with many other pro-life democrats have threatened to oppose the bill until language barring federal funding for abortions is introduced.

Current versions of the House health care legislation do not directly address the issue of abortion, however House leaders have maintained throughout the health care debate that the bill would not allow abortions to be federally funded.

The Speaker needs 218 votes to pass the bill, including as many pro-life Democrats as possible. Pelosi said that although she knows some Democrats have strong convictions regarding abortion, she still believes in their support for health care reform.

“Congressman Ellsworth’s record in Congress and his statements outside of Congress have been strongly pro-life,” Pelosi said. “He and others who have strong pro-life convictions want very much to see a health care bill passed.”

The House Rules Committee Friday will finalize all the rules for this weekend’s House health care debate.

No Taxpayer Funding For Abortions, Says Bipartisan Group

Wednesday, July 22nd, 2009

By Sam Wechsler – Talk Radio News Service

America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 (H.R. 3200) must not include provisions for taxpayer-funded abortions, a bipartisan group of Congressmen led by Rep. Joe Pitts (R-Penn.) said Wednesday morning.

Right now, it’s unclear whether or not such provisions are included in the proposed health care plan. “Failure to explicitly exclude abortions under this health plan will mean that they will be included. That, of course, is a de facto mandate to have them,” said Rep. John Fleming (R-La.).

Rep. Mary Fallin (R-Okla.) said she asked President Obama to clarify his position on whether taxpayer money would be used to provide abortion care, but said she has yet to hear from him. On Wednesday, she called upon him once more at the news conference to come forward and specify his intentions.

Fleming stated that 51 percent of Americans are against abortions, and 69 percent are against taxpayer-funded abortions. Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.) complained that the proposed health care plan would do more to facilitate abortion than any government action since the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court case, despite the fact that the majority of Americans are against it.

Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) said that he expects at least 39 House Democrats to vote against the bill if it does not explicitly exclude abortion from being funded by taxpayer dollars.“We cannot support any health care reform proposal unless it explicitly excludes abortion from the scope of any government defined or subsidized health care plan,” said Stupak.

Killer Peanut Butter: What Can We do?

Wednesday, February 11th, 2009

Coffee Brown, MD, University of New Mexico, for Talk Radio News Service

The Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee examined the current salmonella outbreak as a bellwether for food safety in America. Noting that “This is the ninth time we’ve had to do this in two years,” Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) made clear that there will be new legislation in response. “It’s Upton Sinclair (”The Jungle”) all over again, 100 years later.”
There have been nine deaths – the ninth was reported during the hearing- and 600-800 illnesses attributed to the same source: the Peanut Corporation of America (PCA). 1500 peanut based products have been added to the FDA’s recall list, and consumers are likely to shun even those peanut products which are not implicated, because it’s hard to know for sure. The cost in dollars and lost employment is not known.
Stupak said there were failures at every level, including oversight, monitoring, inspections, and lack of FDA authority, but he placed the blame squarely on PCA. He produced e-mails showing that Stewart Parnell, owner and president, was aware{, at least for 18 months prior to being sent out, that the lab tests showed salmonella.} of lab tests showing salmonella in the batch before he sent it out, and for at least 18 months prior.. Parnell and plant manager Sammy Lightsey both declined to answer questions, citing their fifth amendment rights. Stupak stated he had more evidence than could be made public, because of an ongoing criminal investigation of the matter by the Justice Department.
Families of the victims testified:
Jeff Almer’s mother beat cancer twice: “Cancer couldn’t claim her, but peanut butter did.” He further stated that we need a system that is proactive, not reactive.
Lou Tousignant’s father died after eating contaminated peanut butter. He presented an eloquent memorial DVD and list of recommendations very similar to those being considered.
Peter Hurley is a police officer and father of a three-year-old, Jacob, who was seriously ill for 11 days. His salmonella infection was proven by DNA match to be due to peanut butter snacks made from PCA products. “It was like they were playing Russian roulette with the very young and the elderly,” he said.
Rep John Dingell (D-MI), chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, is sponsoring the FDA Globalization Act, which would provide increased funding, authority, and responsibility for the FDA. It would empower the FDA to mandate recalls, increase some penalties, and add “other safety provisions.”
It came to light during the hearing, that surveillance studies (testing samples for contamination), are ordered at the discretion of the food manufacturers, and collected by them. The testing lab knows nothing about the sample except what the manufacturer tells them. There is also no requirement, or routine process, for reporting contaminated samples to any health agency. The bill by Dingell would address these types of issues.

Sound: Chairman Bart Stupak (D-MI): PCA peanut products had tested positive for salmonella at least 12 times since June 2007.

 
icon for podpress  Standard Podcast: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

The blame game: What’s causing high gas prices?

Monday, June 23rd, 2008

The role of market speculation and its effect on the dramatic increases in the price of oil was discussed by the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Oversight and and Investigations Subcommittee. Rep. Michael Burgess (R-Texas) stated that the American economy will not be sustainable if high prices at the pump continue to climb.

Rep. Jay Inslee (D-Wash.) said a solution to inappropriate speculation would help to lower prices in the short term, contrasting this idea with calls to increase supply by drilling in the ANWR. Inslee said that these measures would affect future generations but have no immediate result now. Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) stated that speculation of future demand for oil has played a large role in oil’s price increase and that one can solve the issue of high prices by traveling to New York or Chicago.

Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) said the cost of oil can be attributed to low supply, not market speculation. Barton suggested opening the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and selling two million barrels each day. Barton said this would return oil prices to under $100 per barrel. He noted that the Bush administration opposes this strategy and that its success would rely on an act of Congress. Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.) said supply and demand principles, as well as deflation and market forces cannot be ignored.

Michael Masters of Masters Capital Management said that investment firms are good at making profits but ignore the long-term consequences of their decisions, naming the subprime mortgage crisis as an example. Inslee recalled being told by Vice President Dick Cheney that he did not understand economics when he presented Cheney with information concerning Enron, comparing that experience with what he views as the Bush administration’s refusal to acknowledge the effect of futures markets on oil.