[fortheDeclaration]

I believe she was referring to the House version, not the Senate one.

Ofcourse, the key issue is over the funding of abortions and so they have to lie about the Senate version not supporting federal funding as well.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Advocates for "the Senate version" try to say the Hyde Amendment takes care of the problem, but that's an absolute evasion. The Hyde Amendment excludes direct funding of abortion via HHS Appropriations Bills, but the Senate version is rife with novel subsidy mechanisms which either do not "mention" abortion, or do not come as part of a HHS appropriation bill. For instance: mandated coverage with mandated insurance premiums; inclusion of reproductive health as part of a "Community Health Center," etc. And of course Kathleen Sebelius gets the power to define what constitutes "reproductive health".

---

Here's a letter I sent to my newspaper

---

Dear Editor,

When a healthy man and a healthy woman get together in a healthy way and have a healthy baby, that can reasonably be called "Reproductive Health."

All too often, though, the term "Reproductive Health" is used as a euphemism for a procedure where a healthy woman goes into a medical office carrying a healthy baby, and comes out empty and bleeding, with the baby--- or what's left of it -- coming out in shreds.

If this is "reproductive health," then strip mining mountaintops is Wilderness Health, whale hunting is Oceanic Health, and clubbing and skinning make for a healthier seal pup.

The current Health Reform proposal subsidizes the termination of lives, would injure thousands of victims, and should be defeated. Deadly procedures do not belong in Health Care.