Last night, an amendment to a children’s bill failed on the US Senate floor by one vote: 49-50. The proposed amendment, offered by anti-choice Senate Wayne Allard, would have allowed states to make an embryo or fetus eligible for the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) – the child, but not the mother.
We’ve blogged about the amendment here.
–Catherine An, ProChoice America dot org
Is there something I am not getting? It seems that you should be construing this as a defeat. Setting aside the issue of creating greater legal recognition for fetuses, women had nothing to loose and everything to gain from the amendment. Pregnant women are not currently covered by the bill being amended, so defeating the amendment does nothing to help women. On the other hand, under the amendment a pregnant women’s fetus would potentially receive care. From the perspective of pregnant women the amendment is Pareto efficient, overturning the amendment is not.
sorry lose not loose
Yes, overturning the amendment is a very good thing. Granting featal health rights whilst denying them for pregnant females is a very quick way to do an end-run around a woman’s right to an abortion. Granting potential human beings medical rights while denying these same rights to actual human beings is down right surreal.