The Independent News Source
Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Cardinal George praises health reform vote
Prohibition on using federal money to pay for most abortions pleases cardinal.
Nov. 10, 2009
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
PDF versionWASHINGTON
Cardinal Francis E. George of Chicago, president of the U.S. bishops, praised the House for approving a reform bill that provides "adequate and affordable health care to all" and "voting overwhelmingly" for a prohibition on using federal money to pay for most abortions.
An amendment to ban abortion funding sponsored by Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., and other House members passed 240-194, and led to passage of the Affordable Health Care for America Act in a 220-215 vote.
In a statement issued late Nov. 9, the cardinal lauded the Nov. 7 vote and urged the Senate to follow the House's example.
The House "honored President (Barack) Obama's commitment to the Congress and the nation that health care reform would not become a vehicle for expanding abortion funding or mandates," he said.
The Senate is expected to take up its version of health care reform later this month. The House and Senate bills differ significantly, so any version the Senate passes will have to be reconciled with the other, and each body will vote again on the final legislation. The Senate bill does not include language on abortion similar to the Stupak amendment.
Cardinal George said the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops "will remain vigilant ... to assure that these essential provisions are maintained and included in the final legislation."
The House bill would provide a combination of subsidies, employer mandates, insurance company requirements and incentives and an option to buy into federally run health care, all intended to provide coverage for millions of uninsured Americans. It also aims to bring spiraling costs under control and eliminate some of the frustrations of the current health system, such as exclusions from insurance coverage for pre-existing medical conditions.
Cardinal George said the Catholic Church is concerned about how health reform "affects the poor and vulnerable, and those at the beginning and end of life."
"We will continue to insist that health care reform legislation must protect conscience rights," he said. "We support measures to make health care more affordable for low-income people and the uninsured. We remain deeply concerned that immigrants be treated fairly and not lose the health care coverage that they now have."
"In the national discussion on how to provide the best kind of health care, we bishops do not claim or present ourselves as experts on health care policy," he said. "We are not prepared to assess every provision of legislation as complex as this proposal.
"However, health care legislation, with all its political, technical and economic aspects, is about human beings and hence has serious moral dimensions," he added.
Cardinal George had been among those in contact with members of Congress as they moved toward a vote on the legislation; for instance, he urged Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., Nov. 6 to allow Stupak's amendment to come to the floor for a vote.
In a series of letters leading up to the vote, the bishops who head the USCCB's committees on Pro-Life Activities, Migration, and Domestic Justice and Human Development had pressed House members to back Stupak's amendment, and expressed their pleasure that it was going to be brought to a vote.
In a letter issued the day of the Nov. 7 House vote, Bishop William F. Murphy of Rockville Centre, N.Y., domestic policy chairman, and Cardinal Justin Rigali of Philadelphia, pro-life chairman, said the amendment would add "crucial provisions that maintain the current protections against abortion funding and mandates."
"Specifically, it will achieve our objective of applying the provisions of the Hyde amendment to the public health plan and on the affordability credits in the exchanges called for in the legislation," they wrote.
They called the amendment "a major step forward," and expressed appreciation for Stupak and six other members of the Democratic pro-life caucus who they said played essential roles in moving the amendment forward -- Reps. Bart Ellsworth and Joe Donnelly of Indiana, Marcy Kaptur of Ohio, James Oberstar of Minnesota, and Mike Doyle and Kathy Dahlkemper of Pennsylvania.
"We also welcome the wise decision of the House leadership to take this important procedural step which we believe will help pass much needed health care reform," they said.
Cardinal Francis George
Cardinal Francis George should be ashamed for lying about the Stupak amendment which goes far beyond the status quo on abortion, preventing lower-class women from even getting private insurance to cover it and forcing them to revert to charlatans, thus endangering their lives.
The bishops should also be ashamed for acting like savage lobbyists or, worse, acting like elected legislators!
Fortunately, Obama will not allow the Senate to introduce such pro-death provisions in its bill and specified his was a health care bill not a pro-fetus-licking piece of legislation.
What an offensive comment.
What an offensive comment. It seems that the only thing that matters to some pro-death, pro-abortion, people is that there should be as many abortions, as many dead unborn children, as possible. It has been said that abortion is the "sacrament" of the liberal left, and it is obviously so given the outrage over a minor provision that respects the freedom of conscience for those of us who oppose abortion in all its forms.
In any event, Obama will take whatever he gets from Congress and be happy with it. All he cares about is that some form of health care reform gets passed before November 2010. And, there can be little doubt that any bill that includes public taxpayer funding for the murder of unborn children will not be passed by the Senate.
Thank God that the majority of the members of Congress respect life more than you do, Yvon.
Your eminence this bill does
Your eminence this bill does allow for the use of frderal money for at least some abortions, so why are you praising it? Are you into the seamless garment of life issues? You sir are no conservative! No wonder the Catholic Church in America has fallen into such decay with "leaders" (and I use the term loosely) like this!
That was all about abortion,
That was all about abortion, the episcopate's number one priority. Now it's about homosexuality, their number two priority. And it has gotten worse. Much worse. The bishops are now blackmailing legislators: if they pass equality laws such as same-sex legislation, they will stop helping the poor, the sick and the homeless!
Those misogynistic and homophobic prelates have really lost their ways. Even their denunciation of "secularism" is a rejection of Jesus of Nazareth who, as everyone knows, was a secular and not a clerical person.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/11/AR200911...
Why does the Church want
Why does the Church want lawmakers to do its job? If the Church cannot convince Catholics, by its moral authority, to follow its moral reachings, it should not demand that public law force Catholics to comply.Congress should NOT be the political arm of the bishops.
This amendment is a good
This amendment is a good first step in the right direction, but only a first step. It is necessary to further restrict abortion so that it becomes less "on-demand" and more "on absolute necessity"; abortion should be the very last thing any woman or doctor considers. It is unlikely that abortion will be ended in one fell swoop, but amendments like the Stupak Amendment will be progressive moves to limit then outlaw this horror.
I am amused by the hue and cry that this amendment has raised in the press and the political world. Women are screaming that their rights are being limited and liberals and so-called progressives are parading about calling this move a defeat for poor women. What the libs seem to be forgetting is that no one person's rights are more important than any other. A woman who wants to have an abortion is no more important than a woman who opposes abortion, and the right of women to murder their unborn children is not more important than my right to not be forced to pay for a medical procedure that I find morally repugnant. The right of one person stops at the point at which it infringes or limits the rights of another, and that is what this amendment is seeking to protect.
I commend Congressman Stupak and all the Democrats and Republicans who joined forces in the service of life, who voted to make sure that my federal taxes, and the federal taxes of millions upon millions of pro-life Americans, will not be used to pay for the wholesale slaughter of innocent unborn children, and who voted to make procuring an abortion just a little less readily available.
They are saving lives, the lives of the most innocent and most vulnerable among us, and their reward will be great in Heaven.
Now that the bill w/the
Now that the bill w/the Stupak amendment has passed the house, the USCCB can not just sit on the sidelines. They have a responsibility to make sure that this bill passes the Senate. We need to get healthcare to the poor and uninsured. This amendment, with stronger language than Hyde, will make it harder to pass. The Bishops got the language they wanted, now they have to provide as much advocacy for the poor as they do the unborn.
The bishops do not care about
The bishops do not care about the poor. All they are interested in is pushing their homophobic, mysogynistic agenda.
Those who oppose abortions do not have to get them. Those who need them are being denied the right to choice--oh yeah, that's something the Pope and the bishops don't believe in. Silly me.
Post new comment