Prayer-Soldier writes "At approximately 4:05pm EDT, 21 Mar 10, Rep Bart Stupak (D – MI) announced that he would vote “yes” on the health care reform bill as a result of a deal made with the White House for an Executive Order which would address pro-life concerns with provisions in relation to abortion in the Senate version of the bill.
In a news conference, Stupak stated, “I am pleased to announce that we have an agreement.” He continued, “With the help of the President and the Speaker, we were able to come with an agreement to protect the sanctity of life within health care reform, that there will be no public funding for abortion in this legislation.”
Stupak stated that “We all stood on principle,” referring back to the 25 Jun 09 letter to Speaker Pelosi signed by pro-life House Democrats that they would not be able to vote for health care reform legislation unless there was language specifically prohibiting the use of taxpayer funds for abortion. The efforts of the pro-life Democrats have been to ensure that the principle of the Hyde Amendment would be carried forward into the health care reform legislation.
Stupak went on to say that “We wanted to see health care reform, but there was a principle that meant more to us than anything and that was the sanctity of life.” Stupak noted that the President agreed to sign an Executive Order which would prevent public funding for abortion. He also related that the Executive Order would be signed after the health care legislation in that the Executive Order would need to refer back to that legislation. As Stupak gave the details of the Executive Order, he stated it would prohibit the use of public funds for abortion, prohibit abortions in public clinics, and protect health care workers who object to abortion from having to participate in abortion procedures.
Prior to the announcement, many debated the force of an Executive Order in relation to legislation. It was noted by many pundits that Executive Orders can be easily reversed. Critics pointed out that the deal was little more than political cover for pro-life Democrats.
Many pro-life advocates had placed their hopes in the courage of the pro-life Democrats to advocate for children conceived, but not yet born. Some pro-life advocates feel that the pro-life Democrats were naive to take the Executive Order bait, others feel out right betrayed, believing the Executive Order will be little more than a smoke screen.
While the President and Speaker have continually held there would be no public funding for abortion in health care reform, some might ask if the Executive Order is now an admission that they were not being forthright about what is contained in the Senate version of the bill. If this provision was misrepresented, then, one might wonder what else has been misrepresented in the effort to sell the legislation.
"