Watch her interview on WTVG here.
Original post from March 20, 2010 at 8:28 a.m.:
Rep. Marcy Kaptur has been claiming to be undecided on the health care bill currently being discussed in the House of Representatives.
She says that she wants to ensure that any language relating to the issue of abortion supports current law which only has government funding when the life of the mother is in danger or in cases of rape or incest.
However, according to Roll Call, she 'doesn't want to be a problem,' for Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
I firmly believe Marcy will tow the party and vote (if there is a vote) in favor of the bill. She's too much of a party loyalist to do otherwise, even if she fails in getting her way on the abortion language.
Knowing that so many in her district oppose this, how will she justify going against the wishes of her district and her own position on abortion? She's already told us:
Kaptur said she believes health care reform legislation would reduce the total number of abortions and reduce the number of premature births and birth defects by providing coverage for pregnant women.
And here, from The Blade:
Asked whether she would oppose the bill if the abortion language was not clarified to her satisfaction, Miss Kaptur said she is weighing the number of abortions that occur annually with the number of infant deaths and premature and underweight births that can be attributed to inadequate health care resulting from the lack of health insurance.
"If we do a better job through the insurance system, we can save lives," she said.
My prediction is that she is going to say that the 'lives saved' by government control of health care will outweigh the 'lives lost' by funding abortion.
Of course, this is completely contrary to the usual liberal claim of 'if it saves even one life,' when instituting various other rules and laws.
And while I'm not Catholic, Marcy is. I doubt this type of justification sits well with her religious upbringing.
What's important to remember is not the specific issue of abortion. Nor is it about Marcy's Catholic faith. This is really about an elected official who states a position on an issue and is given the chance to stand up for that position.
This is about staying true to your principles, regardless of what the specific principle is.
Marcy has taken a public and well-known stand on an issue. Does she maintain her principled stand on that issue or sacrifice it to partisanship by going along with a vote necessary for the success of her party and president?
My prediction is that she'll go along, especially after saying that she 'doesn't want to be a problem' for Pelosi.