Sister Carol Keehan, chief executive of the Catholic Health Association, said in an interview with the Associated Press that she believes the Senate's bill's approach would work just as well as Stupak's preferred approach to keep federal dollars from being used to pay for abortion.

"On the moral issue of abortion, there is no disagreement," Sister Keehan said. "On the technical issue of whether this bill prevents federal funding of abortions, we differ with Right to Life."

The statement by Sister Keehan, who heads an organization of more than 600 Catholic hospitals, nursing homes and health systems across the nation, strikes a sharp contrast with the demands by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and National Right to Life organization for inclusion of Stupak's language in health reform. The Catholic health providers stand to gain from successful health reform, since the uninsured patients they now serve would be eligible for health insurance through the measure.

According to the Associated Press, Douglas Johnson, legislative director for National Right to Life, dismisses the segregation of funds called for in the Senate bill as a bookkeeping trick. His group has served notice it will count any vote for the House bill as support for taxpayer-funded abortion. The bishops reiterated their opposition in a letter to Congress on Friday.

"No Catholic hospital executive has ever turned out hundreds of volunteers to man the phone banks or walk the precincts for an endangered congressman or his challenger," Johnson said in response to the hospital group's announcement.

But Sister Keehan told the Associated Press she'll have to agree to disagree.

"We are trying to respect other people's conscience and views," she said. "But we also weigh in with our conscience and views. We think this bill is a good first step to health care reform."

Sister Keehan wrote a personal statement about the urgent need for health reform in the latest issue of the newspaper Catholic Health World. In it, she reflected on her visit to the White House March 3 to hear President Obama talk about health reform:

"As I watched our president present his plan to pass the health reform legislation, it was clear this is an historic opportunity to make great improvements in the lives of so many Americans. Is it perfect? No. Does it cover everyone? No. But is it a major first step? Yes.

The insurance reforms will make the lives of millions more secure, and their coverage more affordable. The reforms will eventually make affordable health insurance available to 31 million of the 47 million Americans currently without coverage."

Meanwhile, 25 evangelical Christian, Catholic and Baptist leaders sent a letter to Congress March 11. In it, they said disputes over abortion should not be allowed to derail health reform. 

According to the Associated Baptist Press, the religious readers said they believe the Senate bill not only maintains long-standing restrictions on federal funding of abortion, but also provides new support for vulnerable pregnant women that could actually reduce the number of abortions.

"As Christians committed to a consistent ethic of life and deeply concerned with the health and well-being of all people, we want to see health-care reform enacted," the leaders said.

Citing a "lack of clear and accurate information" about the bill, the leaders laid out a page-by-page listing of provisions related to abortion and supports for pregnant women in HR 3590. 

"We are now at a critical moment in the history of our country," the letter concluded. "More than 30 million Americans may finally gain access to a health care system that is affordable -- providing families, children and seniors with fundamental care that is essential to human dignity. We respectfully ask that you make an informed decision about this legislation based on careful deliberation guided by facts."

---

California Rep. Henry Waxman, chair of the Energy and Commerce Committee, told the Associated Press that House leadership will try to secure the necessary 216 votes without reworking the abortion language. Stupak has claimed he has 12 votes against health reform if his abortion ban is not added to the Senate's version of health reform. But Waxman said "many of the pro-life Democrats (in the House) are going to support passage of the health care bill."

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told the Associated Press Thursday that "we have enough (votes) to move forward." Later, in an interview shown on the Rachel Maddow show Thursday night, she said Stupak is wrong when he claims federal funding will go to abortions under the Senate health reform bill. Further, she suggested that the abortion issue is being used by Republicans whose real aim is to block health reform from passing, adding, "I cannot let the good intentions of some be hijacked by those who do not want health care reform."

In an interview with Roll Call, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer explained that no matter what Stupak wants, his wishes cannot in any case be accommodated through the reconciliation bill that will be used to make adjustments to the Senate health reform bill.

“I don’t know that we’ve made a collective judgment on it, but I think his comments are accurate that we believe it’s not possible to do it through reconciliation,” Hoyer said. The Majority leader contended House leadership could get the votes anyway, without giving Stupak what he wants.

“We’re working at it and I think the answer is yes, I think we can,” he said. “We haven’t yet, but because we don’t have a product yet. We’re not through finally putting the reconciliation package together and until we do that, it’s really unrealistic to ask a Member what you are going to do.”

Politico reported today that Pelosi told her members Friday to brace themselves for a climatic health care vote as early as next week, warning them to clear their schedules for next weekend and promising to stay in session until the landmark vote, people present at the meeting told POLITICO. President Barack Obama has postponed an overseas trip until March 21, and Pelosi said, "I am delighted the president will be here for the passage of the bill. It will be historic."

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Organized by Health Care for America NOW, hundreds of pro-health reform protestors arrived in Washington Tuesday morning to conduct "citizens arrests" of insurance company executives gathered at a conference. Watch the action here.

The protest targeted insurance companies that have recently announced giant premium hikes, while also garnering record profits. The demonstration was widely covered by the media. See, for example, the story in the Washington Post.  Also, this story in the Los Angeles Times.

This came as President Obama launched a new series of attacks on insurance companies for their skyrocketing premiums.

But now it turns out our old nemesis -- anti-choice Rep. Bart Stupak of Michigan -- is back! Under the gun to pass the Senate health reform bill within the next two weeks, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is scrambling to round up the needed 216 votes. With Republicans dead set against any health reform plan, she once again is scouring the Democratic delegation to get the votes she needs. You would think with a solid Democratic majority in the House, she would have no trouble. Think again!

First of all, she has to write off the votes of progressive people like Dennis Kucinich, the single-payer advocate who hates the Senate's version of health reform. Then, she has a group of Democrats who voted against health reform last time for a variety of other reasons. Some are leaning toward yes this time, but others are wavering or playing coy, worried about the Congressional elections coming up this fall. Finally, there are the Dems who voted for health reform last time, but are not so sure this time.

What that means is that Stupak may once again be in the driver's seat, as he claims to be able to deliver 12 House votes for the plan. But, what is he demanding in return? He wants to substitute his abortion ban for the Nelson language in the Senate bill. Stupak believes he can somehow do this in the reconciliation bill that would fix various problems the House has with the Senate bill, but parliamentarians in Congress have already ruled that the abortion issue is not germane to the reconciliation bill because it has no immediate budgetary impact.

So, Stupak appears to be asking to have his amendment included in a later "technical fix" or "policy fix" bill that would modify both the Senate bill and the accompanying reconciliation measure. Short of that, he would take a chance to attach his amendment to any upcoming "must pass" bill in the House.

Women's health advocates are taking a strong stand against such a maneuver by Stupak, and working to round up enough votes for health reform that Pelosi will not be forced to strike another deal with him. We also are urging a commitment by Congressional leadership and the White House to fix the Nelson amendment in future health reform "fix" legislation.

Women and our families need health reform desperately. But, reform should not come at the cost of sacrificing women's coverage for abortion, which is a basic part of comprehensive health care and is now covered by most private health insurance plans.

“This is not an immigration bill. It is not an abortion bill. It is a bill about affordable health care for all Americans,” Pelosi said. According to a story in Roll Call, she explained that neither the abortion nor immigration issues can be addressed under a separate reconciliation bill that both the House and Senate are expected to pass in order to fix problems in the Senate legislation. That is because stringent rules governing such bills require provisions to have a direct budgetary impact. RWV colleagues in Washington have suggested that the abortion and immigration issues might be able to be addressed in some fashion in a separate "technical fix" bill down the road.

The Nelson language was adopted in the Senate bill after an intensive 11th hour negotiation marthon between Senator Ben Nelson, an anti-choice Democrat from Nebraska, and Senator Barbara Boxer, a pro-choice California Democrat. New York Senator Charles Schumer, a pro-choice Democrat, acted as mediator, according to reports. Boxer and her pro-choice colleagues in the Senate have defended the compromise as the best they could do to stop adoption of even-worse abortion language similar to the Stupak abortion ban included in the House health reform bill.

But the Senate Nelson language has been widely criticized by women's health organizations, including Raising Women's Voices. The provision allows states to prohibit abortion coverage in private insurance plans offered through state insurance "exchanges," and imposes a burdensome 2-check payment system in those states that decide to allow abortion coverage. Analysis by a George Washington University health policy professor concluded that the requirement for health insurance purchasers to submit two checks -- one for abortion coverage and one for everything else -- would provide to be so unworkable that most insurers would simply drop abortion coverage.

Raising Women's Voices has also raised concerns about potential privacy violations, as women would have to send in what are clearly checks for abortion coverage. Anti-choice employees of insurance companies or banks processing the checks could harass these women, RWV has warned.

How should women's health and immigrant rights advocates respond to what feels like being thrown under the bus? Raising Women's Voices is working on strategies to hold our pro-choice leaders accountable. Visit this blog in the days ahead to see what we come up with!

In a mid-week statement, Obama is expected to produce what his Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs, described as a political road map for the legislation. The basic plan seems to be to first have the House of Representatives pass the Senate's version of health care reform. Then, both the House and Senate would pass a reconciliation bill that makes changes to the Senate bill that the House and the President would like to see. These include such things as more generous subsidies to help people buy insurance through proposed "insurance exchanges."

Experts are saying that the reconciliation measure would not be able to address two "hot button" issues: abortion and treatment of immigrants. Those two issues would be left to a third piece of legislation, which would be designed to make "technical corrections" to the Senate bill. Stay tuned for more information on how that measure would be assembled.

Meanwhile, health reform advocates are organizing a final push to get the legislation over the finish line, according to Politico. Among the planned activities is a demonstration March 9 outside an insurance industry conference that will be taking place in Washington, D.C.

The day was divided into discussion of four areas: cost control, insurance reform, reducing the deficit and expanding coverage.  Though quite a few participants told stories about constituents who are struggling to get the care they need, very few spoke about the specific problems and concerns that affect women.  Representative Louise Slaughter of New York talked about the urgent need to eliminate gender rating, which leads to increased premiums for women, ban exclusions for pre-existing conditions, like domestic violence, which insurance companies use to deny coverage to women.

Late in the day, Representative John Boehner of Ohio delivered a long list of Republican talking points that included a number of false statements, including that the Senate bill would allow federal funding of abortion.  The President responded in an overarching way, saying that he had made many statements that the Democrats vehemently disagree with, and in her closing statement House Speaker Nancy Pelosi made a point of correcting the record.

There weren’t many signs that it will be possible to bridge the policy differences between Democrats and Republicans. But the President was able to keep some focus on the argument that many Republican proposals have been included in the current proposal and that today was a very public call for other Republican suggestions.  Maybe that will give reluctant members of Congress who would like to support health reform, but worry about supporting a bill that seems too partisan, the confidence to move forward and pass legislation.

What happens next?  We have to make sure Congress builds on the opening the summit created to bring its negotiations to a conclusion and pass a bill that makes quality health care affordable in this country.  And we have to keep pushing prochoice allies in Congress to fix the abortion provisions so that health reform won’t set women back by restricting acccess to abortion coverage.

Melanie’s March reached the steps of Capitol Hill at the perfect time. It was an event that not only reminded the government of the urgency of health care reform, but also served as a pep rally on the eve of President Obama’s summit on health care reform.  We joined marchers who had come all the way from Pennsylvania for the last mile of the march, ending at the Dirksen Senate Office Building, and the enthusiasm and energy from the crowd was uplifting.  We listened to speakers which included people who personally knew Melanie, those that completed the entire march from Pennsylvania to D.C. and several Senators including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev). They vowed that they would continue to push for concrete progress in the meeting being held Thursday.

The eight day march was held in honor of Melanie Shouse. She lost a long battle with breast cancer after missing out on critical treatment because she could not find affordable health insurance. Melanie’s story is one like thousands of others and is a story that should not have to be told anymore. Hopefully the next few weeks will prove that the work and lives of so many others will not be lost in vain.

As the first male intern with Raising Women's Voices, I was slightly nervous about joining close to 700 other activists in the New York area to march for health care this past Saturday, February 20th. While this experience was ultimately both encouraging and rewarding, I didn't know whether my gender would make me feel like the odd-man-out. Sponsored by many health advocacy organizations, this particular march for health care aimed at reminding the public that the Health Care Reform debate is long from being over. While some might argue it has lost its initial zeal, in response to both the turn out and passion of the crowd this past weekend, I would say the zeal is in fact very much alive and now even angrier. 

Early Saturday morning, a few sleepy friends and I headed downtown from Columbia University to Brooklyn and met with a large crowd of people bedecked with large signs, small signs, signs pinned to clothes and signs pinned to dogs. Each sign had been handcrafted and detailed with a message that made our collective point very clear: Health Insurance is a right that should be guaranteed to all Americans.  

But it was one sign that I read that affected me the most. There was a photograph of a young girl and below it read: "Died because she had no health insurance. 08/1990-07/2007"

It's easy to say that each year 45,000 Americans die without health insurance and even more declare bankruptcy. But the truth is, until it hits home, learning the message can be very hard. Here was a girl who was my age, born several months after me, who would have been in my grade, died because of the faulty system we're employing right now. What scared me the most was that she was my age. To think that health care reform is something that only affects the older people or very sick people can is wrong. In reality, it affects us all. Immediately I had a sense of shame that all I had wanted to do was go back to bed in the morning. I chanted louder, and even louder. I believe in health care reform, but not just because I'm told to, but rather because I was inspired to. 

The march over the bridge to Manhattan was marked with loud chants, honking cars and bystanders actively asking participants for more information. The sun was out, the weather was gorgeous, and a sense of hope and unity permeated the crowd. People were friendly to each other but angry about health care. They fury was tangible as people yelled in agreement with cars who honked their support.

The march ended at 1 Liberty Plaza outside of the WellPoint, Inc., a pharmaceutical company, located in the heart of the Financial District. For about thirty minutes a manmade stage was used to host activists, speakers, and participants as we listened to each others words on health care.  We had a united cause and were advocating for comprehensive, not discriminatory, health care. 

In reality, it doesn't matter that I'm a boy. What I learned at this march is that the lack of health care affects women and men, the young and old, Black, Latino, White, gay, straight, Catholic, Jewish, Muslim--everyone suffers without a comprehensive health care system. My nerves about being a boy with a feminist organization evaporated as soon as I arrived to Brooklyn. 

After the rally was over I headed back to Columbia. I had homework and chores to do, but I left with some new insight to this debate. So many people are affected by the lack of health care in this country. And it is a human rights violation for the US Government to not provide aid to all people in this country. Even though I woke up early and took a long subway trip down and up, I was proud of myself for marching and voicing my opinion. If you want to join in the fight for health reform, it’s not too late! Take action today! 

by Carlos Blanco, RWV intern