…something or other. Just not what the majority of her constituents really want.
In this (now) majority Republican 8th Congressional district of Northern Illinois, Melissa Bean (who won it when it was slightly more liberal), refused–again–to represent her constituency. I had written her via her Web site asking her to support the Stupak-Pitts amendment during the House vote on the health “care” bill.
Here was the form letter response I’m used to getting from her email daemon. My own emphasis and commentary is added.
Dear Mr. Watson,
Thank you for contacting me about reproductive rights and the Stupak amendment to H.R. 3962, The Affordable Health Care for America Act. I am honored to represent you, and I appreciate your active participation in our legislative process. Your involvement makes democracy work better by helping me more effectively represent you and Illinois’ Eighth District.
On the issue of reproductive rights, I support existing law in the United States, which protects a woman’s right to choose while allowing individual states a limited right to regulate access to abortion without threatening a woman’s life or health. As a result, I support legislation that is consistent with this principle and does not seek to broaden or limit this standard, which has been upheld for over thirty-five years by multiple U.S. Supreme Court decisions. [as if the Supreme Court upholding something can or should make it the will of the people. Wouldn’t that be admitting a violation of separation of powers by showing that the judges are indeed legislating from the bench? Roe v. Wade has yet to be put to any kind of legitimate vote…the ACLU has seen to that.]
Current law prohibits federal funding for abortion services as is dictated in the “Hyde Amendment” which has been applied in relevant legislation for over thirty years, including the original version of H.R. 3962. Prior to the Stupak Amendment, the House bill continued longstanding federal policy, which currently bars federal funding for paying for abortions except in the case of rape, incest, or to save the life of the woman but allowed private insurance companies to offer abortion coverage. In fact, the bill clearly spelled out that no federal funds could be used to pay for abortions except in the case of rape, incest, or to save the life of the woman including that no affordability credits would pay for coverage in private or public insurance. [Yet Planned Parenthood received some $305.3 million in government funds in the 2005-06 fiscal year. Oh, and it also aids and abets child rapists and disproportionately aborts black children, which neither the Hyde nor Stupak Amendment even mention.]
I did not support the Stupak-Pitts amendment when is [sic] passed the House of Representatives by a margin of 240 to 194. This amendment, as written, prohibits federal subsidies from going to any private plan in the health care exchange that covers abortion care. Although I did not support the Stupak amendment, I will continue to support the “status quo” regarding abortion policy
and its inclusion in the final version of health insurance reform.
Thank you again for contacting me about this important issue. I am proud to serve Illinois’ Eighth District, and I am committed to working hard for you. Please do not hesitate to write, call, or email if I can ever help you in any way.
Melissa L. Bean
Member of Congress
Actually, I’m thinking I need to make an appointment to visit her office in person and speak to her face-to-face before what I have to say will ever reach her actual attention. Maybe I’ll bring along my 67 year-old mom, who was born with cerebral palsy and might not have been so lucky had she been born to a confused, desperate, and deceived mother in today’s abortion-for-convenience environment.