By Dave Andrusko

Part Two tells the story of a Philadelphia abortionist whose license was pulled. Must reading. If you have comments on either Part One or Part Two, please write to daveandrusko@gmail.com.

Even as I write this the jockeying for position by the White House and Democratic congressional leadership has gone into overdrive in preparation for Thursday's Health Care "summit." The maneuvering is important to us not because it is a fascinating exercise in political spin (although it is clearly that), but because President Obama's "add ons" this week would worsen an already pro-abortion Senate bill, H.R. 3590.

On Monday NRLC first commented on the changes Obama proposed to make to the bill the Senate passed last December. (See http://nrlactioncenter.com.)

"For pro-life Democrats in the House, President Obama's proposal only makes matters worse," explained NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson. "If all of the President's changes were made, the resulting legislation would allow direct federal funding of abortion on demand through Community Health Centers, would institute federal subsidies for private health plans that cover abortion on demand (including some federally administered plans), and would authorize federal mandates that would require even non-subsidized private plans to cover elective abortion."

He added, "The scope of the abortion-related problems with the Obama-backed legislation are being vastly understated in the mainstream news media."

At http://nrlactioncenter.com, you will also find a quick explanation of a formally arcane legislative procedure that is getting enormous amounts of attention: reconciliation.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid

"Obama, Pelosi, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid plan to have the Senate pass a second, smaller bill, containing certain changes to H.R. 3590, using a fast-track procedure called 'reconciliation' that would not be subject to a Republican filibuster," Johnson said. "Under this plan, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Ca.) would then push the House to pass both the original Senate-passed H.R. 3590 and the new package of changes at about the same time, and President Obama would sign both bills into law."

However, the bottom line remains, "[T]his convoluted two-bill scheme cannot succeed if enough House pro-life Democrats remain firm in their refusal to vote for the Senate-passed health bill."

Just a couple of other quick comments. First, when you read the post at http://nrlactioncenter.com, you will find information about how to contact your U.S. senators and your U.S. House member. Time is short!

Second, the theory underlying the Democrats attempt to ram this bill through is that people will be gullible enough to buy their argument that Democrats had no other choice because Republicans were so uniformly opposed.

This, however, avoids the uncomfortable truth (for them) that there are a number of pro-life Democrats in the House--and Democrats who are not pro-life in the House and Senate--who oppose the measure on substantive and procedural grounds. It also assumes that the public is so unaware that they do not understand that Obama/Reid/Pelosi have adopted a "my way, or else" approach to fundamentally restructuring 1/6th of the entire American economy.

Appearing on Fox Morning News earlier today, pro-Life Congressman Bart Stupak (D-Mi.) cut right to the chase.

It would be "a radical departure," Stupak said, for the federal government to fund abortion, and it is "unacceptable."

Part Two