The Stupak Amendment: An Assault On Women

The Abortion Care Network, a national organization of independent abortion providers and allies, decries passage of the Stupak-Pitts amendment to the Affordable Health Care for America Act. Once again the United States Congress has turned its back on women.


In a shocking act of disdain for American women, the Stupak-Pitts amendment would actually result in women losing the abortion coverage many of them already have because it would prohibit abortion coverage in the new private insurance market as well as any possible public option.

This is a truly cowardly slap in the face of the more than 90 million American women and men who have chosen legal abortion. We send our gratitude to members of Congress who voted against this anti-woman amendment.

The essence of freedom is protection of individual choice. We live in a pluralistic society in which there are dissenting views on many topics related to healthcare—blood transfusions, fertility treatments, hospice, immunizations, adoption, circumcision, sterilization, and birth control to name a few.

Yet it is only the service of abortion that has been singled out and used, once again, as a political football. If the religious fundamentalists are able to achieve this, they might well go on to eliminate insurance coverage for contraception, stem cell research, infertility treatments, and any other medical care that doesn’t fit with their religious doctrine.

We like to call ourselves the land of the free, but since 1977’s Hyde Amendment prohibiting Federal Funding for abortion services for the poorest of women, there has been no freedom of choice for women.  If one option is funded and another is not, then women who have no resources have no choice. Independent providers and private funders have done everything we can to try to bridge this unbridgeable gap. We have donated literally millions of dollars of services–yet many of us are small medical practices, and we cannot hope to meet the need of the millions of good women who are making the best choices they can for themselves and their families.
passage of the Stupak-Pitts amendment to the Affordable Health Care for America Act. Once again the United States Congress has turned its back on women.

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

For more information or to schedule an interview with contact

  • rguillory

    Thanks for your great post!

    I had a Eureka! moment when talking with a friend who works in an orthopoedic clinic where they sometimes treat Jehovah’s Witnesses. This particular group of Christians believes that blood transfusions go against their medical ethics, their morality, God’s law.

    Now, what if they succeeded in making blood transfusions–legal, but immoral in their eyes–unattainable by all other means when they failed repeatedly on open attempts to criminalize them under US law? What exactly would be the politics of that, I wonder?

    Jehovash’s Witnesses can opt not to have a blood transfusion, though their tax monies will go toward funding blood transfusions for everyone else who needs one. Can they learn to live with it? Or will they launch an anti-transfusion movement to bring the rest of us in line?

    Stay tuned.

    Here’s my blog….

  • jgbeam

    Stupak has nothing against women. The amendment prohibits federal funds from paying for abortions. Would you rather the funds be used for aborting about 700,000 female babies each year? Apparently so.

    Jim Grant, Pro-lifer

  • drnancy


    Many of us noticed that all mention of choice and abortion rights were scrubbed from Dem candidate websites heading into the ’08 election. 

    Obama was both a strong advocate for women and also suggested women consult their husband and minister before considering an abortion. What would we have said about a republican saying that??  Placing anti -choice Kaine at the head of the DNC  should have told us all we needed to know.

    We got hustled by the Democratic Party.  Can anyone explain why? 

    What is really going on here?

    {{Hi Charlotte!}}