[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 23]
[House]
[Page 30784]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                OPPOSITION TO THE STUPAK-PITTS AMENDMENT

  (Ms. SCHAKOWSKY asked and was given permission to address the House 
for 1 minute.)
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise on behalf of my constituents who 
called, faxed, emailed me in strong opposition to the Stupak-Pitts 
language and its inclusion in health care reform.
  The grand myth in this debate is that the Stupak amendment is simply 
an extension of current law, which prohibits the use of Federal funds 
for abortions except in the case of rape or incest or to protect the 
life of a mother. It is not current law. It would be the largest 
restriction on abortion access since Roe v. Wade--preventing women from 
using private dollars to purchase coverage for a legal medical service.
  A recent George Washington School of Public Health study warns that 
the Stupak language will reduce access to women who already have it by 
encouraging insurers to ``drop coverage in all markets.'' That is not 
the status quo.
  The Stupak-Pitts language is unfair, unnecessary, and unwise. The 
Senate rightly rejected it last night. It cannot be part of health care 
reform. Women will not be forced back to back alleys.

                          ____________________