I received the following infuriating reply from Senator Casey to one of the e-mails I sent regarding going beyond the existing strictures of the Hyde amendment and effectively eliminating abortion as a reimbursable procedure:
Dear JSM:
Thank you for taking the time to contact me about health care reform. I appreciate hearing from all Pennsylvanians about the issues that matter most to them.
As a public official and particularly as a United States Senator, I have sought to support a consistent and comprehensive ethic of life and to pursue the common good, as best I can understand it. I am pro-life, and I believe that life begins at conception and ends when we draw our last breath. I also believe that we must protect and nurture life at every point in that process. My actions as a United States Senator have been consistent with this philosophy. Being truly pro-life means protecting the dignity and sanctity of every human being—including the poor, the disenfranchised, the vulnerable—both before and after birth, throughout every stage of life.
Emphasis is mine. Please head below the fold for the rest of Casey's e-mail and my response...
Casey's e-mail continued:
We are currently engaged in a crucially important debate on health care reform. As a Nation, we cannot afford to wait any longer to reform America’s health care system. As a member of the United States Senate and of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, I am working with my colleagues and with President Obama to enact meaningful health care reform, with the goal of providing every American access to high quality, affordable health care.
I believe that federal and state funds should not be used to fund abortions, and that conscience protections must remain in place. These are essential components of health care reform, and I will continue to work with the President and my colleagues in Congress to ensure that existing prohibitions and protections remain in place. Health care reform legislation should not be used to change longstanding federal policies regarding abortion funding.
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the health care reform bill currently being debated in the Senate, includes language similar to that contained in the Capps Amendment in the House of Representatives. I am concerned that the language does not sufficiently restrict federal funding from being used for abortions and will continue to work with my colleagues to ensure that this language is strengthened. I voted for cloture (a procedural motion to begin debate) so that we can start the floor debate on this bill, which is the only way we can proceed to address the abortion language in the bill. I support including language similar to the Stupak Amendment language included in the House-passed health care reform bill.
Another concern that has been brought to my attention is the fear that health care reform will lead to rationing of care. Health care reform will not lead to rationing of care for older Americans or those with serious health problems. In fact, the consumer protections included in health care reform will make it easier for people with health problems to buy health insurance, and protect them from being dropped from their health insurance if they get sick. Health care reform also prohibits lifetime caps and unreasonable annual caps on the amount of care an individual can receive, ensuring that individuals who need care the most will have access to their doctors and medical providers.
Please be assured that I will keep your thoughts in mind as Congress continues to work on health care reform. For more information, and to read the text and summaries of the bills, please visit my website at http://casey.senate.gov.
Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future about this or any other matter of importance to you.
If you have access to the Internet, I encourage you to visit my web site, http://casey.senate.gov. I invite you to use this online office as a comprehensive resource to stay up-to-date on my work in Washington, request assistance from my office or share with me your thoughts on the issues that matter most to you and to Pennsylvania.
Sincerely,
Bob Casey
United States Senator
Once again, emphasis is mine. My reply:
Senator Casey,
In your recent e-mail response to me regarding pending health care reform legislation and the possible impact on the availability of abortion services you stated that "I am pro-life, and I believe that life begins at conception and ends when we draw our last breath."
Here's the problem as I see it, I am also pro-life, but my belief about when life begins is vastly different from yours. Based on my religious faith, in a tradition by the way that predates yours, I believe that life begins at birth when the soul is imparted by G-d. What exists prior to that point is a potential for life, but not life, for absent a soul, there is not a full human being.
Now that does not mean to me that a fetus has no value, to the contrary, it has great value, but value that is not equal to the value of the life, health and well-being of a mother who has vital every-day responsibility for the health and well-being of herself and the members of her family. It is on this basis that my religion requires that a pregnancy that threatens the health and well-being of a mother not only can, but must be terminated.
I well understand that precluding the expenditure of federal funds for "elective" abortions theoretically does not prevent a woman from obtaining an abortion, but the reality of the Stupack-Pitts amendment passed by the House, should such a provision survive the legislative process, will in fact mean that insurance companies will stop including abortion as a reimbursable procedure. As I'm sure you know, should insurance companies not reimburse for an abortion there are hundreds of thousands of women who would be unable to pay for the procedure out of pocket.
So, while I appreciate and respect your personal beliefs, I expect that you, as an important elected official, will respect the personal beliefs of your constituents and that you will neither introduce nor vote for any legislation that would further restrict the ability of women of conscience from obtaining an abortion that they, in their individual wisdom, in consultation with their family, doctor and religious advisers, might decide that they need, beyond the restrictions that already exist.
Best regards,
JSM
I am getting really sick and tired of having the "logical" extension of a completely wrong interpretation of a biblical story being shoved down my throat, however politely, by folks like Bob Casey - who I am fine with on most of his positions and votes.
For me, the right to abortion services has been an issue of religious freedom pretty much from the beginning - or at least since I started voting, some 24 years ago. I've always wondered if pro-choice forces made a fundamental mistake in relying on the right to privacy as the basis of their legal battle with the right-to-life crowd.
I'm not a lawyer, so I can't speak to the state of affairs of legal precedent when decisions were made that resulted in Roe v. Wade, as those opposed to choice have successfully whittled away the right to an abortion I can't help but wonder if now is the time to find a test case based on religious belief and take it to the top.