"Nathan Newman" <nathan at newman.org> writes:
>Dems on the committee like Schumer, who seem willing to screw
> their union/consumer base on this one, are not willing to abandon the
> pro-choicers so they are not budging on the issue.
-Wow! Who put the anti-abortion provision in the bill? Why can't -they just be covered by prevailing bankruptcy law?
The Dems in the Senate put the provision into the bill, some because they just wanted to please the pro-choicers, some who oppose the bill in toto because they knew the House conservatives would hate the provision and might kill the bill rather than signoff on it. The abortion provision and the limit on the value of homes that could be shielded in bankruptcy proceedings (dear to Texas hearts) have been the two largest brawls over the bill. The "homestead" provision was managed with a compromise, but the abortion issue as usual doesn't really have many ways to please both sides.
I'm hoping the whole damn thing go down on the provision, or that whatever compromise is reached kills the bill when it goes back to one or the other chamber for a vote.
-- Nathan Newman