A new poll suggests voter backlash against U.S. Rep. John Barrow is likely if he votes for a health care bill that funds abortion.
The poll found that 53 percent of voters in the Democrat's 12th Congressional District -- which includes a portion of the Augusta area -- say they're less likely to vote for a congressman who casts such a vote.
That view, said the results due to be released today, was shared by 32 percent of Democratic voters and 59 percent of the independents.
Only 29 percent of all respondents said they were more likely to cast ballots for someone who voted for a health care bill that pays for abortions.
The survey was conducted Thursday through Sunday by the polling company inc./ WomanTrend for the anti-abortion Susan B. Anthony List.
The group sponsored polls - which had a 5.6 percent margin of error - in Barrow's district and those of six other anti-abortion Democrats. While the numbers varied, the overall results were similar.
"We want them to know there are consequences to voting with special interests instead of their constituents," said Marilyn Musgrave of the Anthony List group.
The congressmen are being pressed by the White House to vote - perhaps this week - for a health care bill that likely will include abortion funding.
The Senate passed it late last year, but it differed from a House-passed version that barred funding for elective abortions.
As Democrats tried to iron out that and other wrinkles, they lost their 60-vote Senate majority - and thus their ability to cut off Republican debate on most bills.
Now they hope the House will pass the Senate bill, and that both chambers can use a budget "reconciliation" bill to resolve their differences. That can be passed with the simple majority that Democrats still have in the Senate.
But that strategy also may require the votes of members like Barrow, who voted to amend the House bill to ban federal funds from being used for abortions. He also voted against the bill.
"It's fairly clear that Barrow could pay a high political price" if he goes along, said polling company CEO Kellyanne Conway.
The nationally known pollster's political surveys are conducted mostly for Republicans and conservatives.
The 12th District poll indicated 43 percent of respondents think Barrow should vote against the bill even if it bars abortion funding. Only 24 percent want him to vote for it if it doesn't.
He has expressed support for the right to have an abortion, but also has said that right doesn't include the right to make others pay for it.
He hasn't announced how he'll vote on the bill because he doesn't know yet what will be in it, spokeswoman Jane Brodsky said recently.
But, asked for comment on the poll results, Brodsky issued a statement on his behalf Monday that hinted which way he leans.
"I was elected by the people of the 12th District, and theirs is the only voice I care about," he said.
Barrow cited language in the House bill that prevents federal funds from being used to pay for elective abortions.
"I agree with it," he said.
You need to replace the word "could" with "WILL face a back lash.
Only in Augusta does 42% plus 24% equal 100%. Who took the poll and what was the question that obviously 34% wanted? And who is this esteemed polling company? In fact they polled 300 people in each district and asked if people if they thought the Fed should fund abortion. Well guess what, it is already against the law and not in the healthcare bill. So if you mislead the public into thinking it is shame on you. I would like to see the words that make it a part of the bill.
dissman, if you wanna think, go somewhere else. this is where we yell.
Here's my idiosyncratic take on this matter. First, is it likely that Democrat John Barrow would get Republican and/or Tea Party folks' votes in November if he voted against Obama's health care reform? He certainly would not gain the favor of the Democrat leadership anymore than Dennis Kucinich would have gained anything from voting against this measure.
southernguy08 is right when he wrote that John Barrow is no idiot. He triangulates issue quite well. As a Blue Dog Democrat in a Red State he has too, efforts at intimidation from Billy Morris's news service notwithstanding.
The question for me remains this: I will continue to support Dennis Kucinich because he is anti-war. I voted for John Barrow in the last three elections. I personally like the guy, but his is slippery. I may not show up at the polls in November if Barrow continues to fund America's endless wars.
Health care reform as an issue simply does not have the import that mass killing done in my name has. Now, I have served John Barrow notice. He cannot count on my vote unless he frees himself from the undue influence of the national security hawks and finds the personal courage to vote against more war funding. Even if that is politically unpopular, it is the right and wise thing to do. Barrow's vote on health care reform is beside the issue.
And my family will vote for him if he votes against this Health Care Bill, and continues his support of our troops and their fight against muslim terrorists who would love to kill us. Now I won't vote for him, but the rest of the family have said they will if he votes no on the HC Bill.
crackerjack - if you want to kill Muslim terrorists who would like to kill Americans then why haven't you supported an American initiative to invade Saudia Arabia where the 9/11 terrorists came from?
For the same reason that this administration won't tell you. They don't want Saudi Arabia to quit selling us oil.
And I don't hate the President for being the puppet of SEIU, and ACORN. And you can tell how much he loves the Saudis, by how he bows down to them at every opportunity.
The wording of a poll question can greatly influence the answer.
This is a good example.
The fact is that the current healthcare bill's wording on abortions are COMPLETELY consistent with the current federal law as defined by the Hyde amentment - abortions are only paid for in the cases of rape, incest or to save the mother's life.
Claims to the contrary should be added to the Palin death panel pile.
does he hold hands yet? http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-april-27-2005/moment-of-zen---bush...
Thanks Dissman for pointing out an important fact that funding abortion IS Not in the healthcare bill. It is amazing that there are individuals who continue to get things twisted, shouts half truths and bellows out misleading messages just because...
I have read enough to know that the bill will cost me more money for something I don't recieve. Why should I pay for something that someone else wants. The next time I'm in the store, how about paying for my groceries. Same difference!!
lorraine, please google senate bill and abortion. I would not rely on those with an agenda for information. If it did not include funds for abortion, it would have been voted on and passed weeks ago.
Local Interests.....Even if it is like that, all someone has to do is lie about being raped or incest, and since these abortions are confidential, who will know that they were paid for by the Health Care Bill.
From a Democrat: Rep. James Oberstar of Minnesota, one of those 10 pro-life Democrats who voted yes on the House measure, firmly told Congressional Quarterly on February 24, "I will not vote for a health care bill that doesn't have the House abortion language in it."
For those opposed to govt run healthcare in Barrow's district. Get on the phone & call the man's office right now. Do not delay. Every single vote counts (unless they cheat the system & use the Slaughter maneuver).
Here's his Washington DC # (202) 225-2823 and his Augusta # (706)722-4494. Call both offices.
This is some of what they are voting on... No Death Panels?
Page 22 of the HC Bill: Mandates that the Govt will audit books of all employers that self-insure!!
Page 30 Sec 123 of HC bill: THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get.
Page 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill: YOUR HEALTH CARE IS RATIONED!!!
Page 42 of HC Bill: The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your HC benefits for you. You have no choice!
Page 50 Section 152 in HC bill: HC will be provided to ALL non-US citizens, illegal or otherwise.
Page 58 HC Bill: Govt will have real-time access to individuals' finances & a 'National ID Health card' will be issued!
Page 59 HC Bill lines 21-24: Govt will have direct access to your bank accounts for elective funds transfer.
Page 65 Sec 164: Is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in unions & community organizations:
Page 84 Sec 203 HC bill: Govt mandates ALL benefit packages for private HC plans in the 'Exchange.'
Page 85 Line 7 HC Bill: Specifications of Benefit Levels for Plans -- The Govt will ration your health care!
Page 91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill: Govt mandates linguistic appropriate services. (Translation: illegal aliens.)
Page 95 HC Bill Lines 8-18: The Govt will use groups (i.e. ACORN & Americorps to sign up individuals for Govt HC plan.
Page 85 Line 7 HC Bill: Specifications of Benefit Levels for Plans. (AARP members - your health care WILL be rationed!)
Page 102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill: Medicaid eligible individuals will be automatically enrolled in Medicaid. (No choice.)
Page 12 4 lines 24-25 HC: No company can sue GOVT on price fixing. No "judicial review" against Govt monopoly.
Page 127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill: Doctors/ American Medical Association - The Govt will tell YOU what salary you can make.
Page 145 Line 15-17: An Employer MUST auto-enroll employees into public option plan. (NO choice!)
Page 126 Lines 22-25: Employers MUST pay for HC for part-time employees ANDtheir families. (Employees shouldn't get excited about this as employers will be forced to reduce its work force, benefits, and wages/salaries to cover such a huge expense.)
Page 149 Lines 16-24: ANY Employer with payroll 401k & above who does not provide public option will pay 8% tax on all payroll! (See the last comment in parenthesis.)
Page 150 Lines 9-13: A business with payroll between $251K & $401K who doesn't provide public option will pay 2-6% tax on all payroll.
Page 167 Lines 18-23: ANY individual who doesn't have acceptable HC according to Govt will be taxed 2.5% of income.
Page 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill: Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes. (Americans will pay.)
Page 195 HC Bill: Officers & employees of the GOVT HC Admin.. will have access to ALL Americans' finances and personal records.
Page 203 Line 14-15 HC: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax." (Yes, it really says that!)
Page 239 Line 14-24 HC Bill: Govt will reduce physician services for Medicaid Seniors. (Low-income and the poor are affected.)
Page 241 Line 6-8 HC Bill: Doctors: It doesn't matter what specialty you have trained yourself in -- you will all be paid the same! (Just TRY to tell me that's not Socialism!)
Page 253 Line 10-18: The Govt sets the value of a doctor's time, profession, judgment, etc. (Literally-- the value of humans.)
Page 265 Sec 1131: The Govt mandates and controls productivity for "private" HC industries.
Page 268 Sec 1141: The federal Govt regulates the rental and purchase of power driven wheelchairs.
Page 272 SEC. 1145: TREATMENT OF CERTAIN CANCER HOSPITALS - Cancer patients - welcome to rationing!
Page 280 Sec 1151: The Govt will penalize hospitals for whatever the Govt deems preventable (i.e...re-admissions).
Page 298 Lines 9-11: Doctors: If you treat a patient during initial admission that results in a re-admission -- the Govt will penalize you.
Page 317 L 13-20: PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. (The Govt tells doctors what and how much they can own!)
Page 317-318 lines 21-25, 1-3: PROHIBITION on expansion. (The Govt is mandating that hospitals cannot expand.)
Page 321 2-13: Hospitals have the opportunity to apply for exception BUT community input is required. (Can you say ACORN?)
Page 335 L 16-25 Pg 336-339: The Govt mandates establishment of outcome-based measures. (HC the way they want -- rationing.)
Page 341 Lines 3-9: The Govt has authority to disqualify Medicare Advance Plans, HMOs, etc. (Forcing people into the Govt plan)
Page 354 Sec 1177: The Govt will RESTRICT enrollment of 'special needs people!'
Page 379 Sec 1191: The Govt creates more bureaucracy via a "Tele-Health Advisory Committee."
Page 425 Lines 4-12: The Govt mandates "Advance-Care Planning Consult." (Think senior citizens end-of-life patients.)
Page 425 Lines 17-19: The Govt will instruct and consult regarding living wills, durable powers of attorney, etc. (And it's mandatory!)
Page 425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3: The Govt provides an "approved" list of end-of-life resources; guiding you in death. (Also called 'assisted suicide.')
Page 427 Lines 15-24: The Govt mandates a program for orders on "end-of-life." (The Govt has a say in how your life ends!)
Page 429 Lines 1-9: An "advanced-care planning consultant" will be used frequently as a patient's health deteriorates.
Page 429 Lines 10-12: An "advanced care consultation" may include an ORDER for end-of-life plans..
Page 429 Lines 13-25: The GOVT will specify which doctors can write an end-of-life order.. (I wouldn't want to stand before God after getting paid for THAT job!)
Page 430 Lines 11-15: The Govt will decide what level of treatment you will have at end-of-life!
Page 469: Community-Based Home Medical Services = Non-Profit Organizations. (Hello? ACORN Medical Services here!?!)
Page 489 Sec 1308: The Govt will cover marriage and family therapy. (Which means Govt will insert itself into your marriage even.)
Page 494-498: Govt will cover Mental Health Services including defining, creating, and rationing those services.
Here it is........
Sec. 222. Essential benefits package defined. Outlines the broad categories of benefits required to be included in the essential benefits package, prohibits any cost‐sharing for preventive benefits (including well child and well baby care), and limits annual out‐of‐pocket spending in the essential benefits package to $5,000 for an individual and $10,000 (indexed to CPI) for a family. Defines the initial essential benefit package as being actuarially equivalent to 70% of the package if there were no cost‐sharing imposed. Requires the Secretary to assess adding counseling for domestic violence as part of the behavioral health or primary care visit. Prohibits abortion services from being made part of essential benefits package. Prohibits federal funds from being used to pay for abortion (except in cases of rape, incest, and to save life of the woman). Only private premium dollars can be used to provide abortion coverage. Where abortion coverage is provided, funds for this purpose must be segregated from other funds, including affordability credits. Includes a report regarding the need and cost of providing oral health care to adults as part of the essential benefits package. In the developing the essential benefit package, the Secretary shall support the need for assessment and counseling for domestic violence as part of the behavioral health assessment or primary care visit.
Sec. 258. Application of state and federal laws regarding abortion. Makes clear that nothing in this act pre‐empts state laws with regard to abortion nor changes existing federal laws regarding conscience protections, willingness or refusal to provide abortion, and discrimination on the basis of such willingness or refusal.
The truth shall set you free!
Have you heard about McDonald's new Obama Value Meal?
Order anything you like and the guy behind you has to pay for it.
If Obama says jump--Barrow says "how high?" Good-bye John!
crackerjack, your post at 3:53 was pure nonsense.
However, you post at 4:15 looked like actual text from the bill. It was quite clear. Current law regarding abortions will remain intact.
This whole abortion thing is just another red herring.
crakerjack, I commend your efforts to at least provide sources of your info. Many just post their opinion as fact. But, you posted a section of the House Bill 3200. That is not the bill being gently moved through the back door. It is the Senate version which does not contain the abortion language that the House version does. That's the problem (for the Dems), otherwise, it would be law already.
Thanks just the facts, I will have a gander at the Senate Bill.
I believe that the House-passed bill (H.R. 3962), as revised by the Stupak-Pitts Amendment that was adopted by the House on November 7, 2009, by a vote of 240-194, meets the minimal requirements explained below, with respect to abortion policy. Regrettably, the House-passed bill and the Senate-passed bill (H.R. 3590) are far more divergent on abortion policy matters than one would understand on the basis of accounts in the news media. In reality, the Senate-passed bill contains provisions that would ultimately result in substantial expansions of abortion, driven by federal administrative decrees and federal subsidies.
And as I put in my 4:15 comment.......
Sec. 258. Application of state and federal laws regarding abortion. Makes clear that nothing in this act pre‐empts state laws with regard to abortion nor changes existing federal laws regarding conscience protections, willingness or refusal to provide abortion, and discrimination on the basis of such willingness or refusal. So as I understand this, any monies that are given to the States for Health Care can be used for anything as to the States interpretation of HealthCare, not to be pre-empted by the Federal Government. (Abortions)
crackerjack, i think sec 258 means that this act wouldn't affect abortion laws. not that abortions (a legal medical procedure) would be funded.
What I would like to see is legislation that removes a lot of the hurdles and red tape in the adoption process. It's a shame that we have to go out of country to adopt a child, when we have plenty of viable children here that need good, loving homes.
encouraging people to adopt kids is a great idea. i'd like to see something that helps people adopt kids who want homes, too. is anyone working on something like that?
The Augusta Chronicle ©2012. All Rights Reserved.
