"I want to make sure that the provision that emerges meets that test -- that we are not in some way sneaking in funding for abortions, but, on the other hand, that we're not restricting women's insurance choices," he said.This comes on the tails of reporting that Stupak's amendment is not just controversial, but really confusing. By forbidding abortion coverage from any government plan, the amendment would contradict a central tenet of the legislation. It amounts to creating a strong disincentive for insurance companies to offer the coverage. And, as Ezra Klein points out, it would disproportionately impact poorer women.
A Director at the Center for American Progress notes, in this article, that Stupak's amendment "hasn't been thought through." But it clearly has further complicated an already unpredictable legislative debate.
One thing is certain: Stupak's national profile has, perhaps unwittingly, been raised. It will be interesting to watch what happens to him.
