Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (12691)	12/24/2009 5:35:45 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

Its not a technicality, its an issue of principle. I'm not seeing your principle. It seems like you're trying to sever the amendment from the bill and say that the amendment, in itself, doesn't do anything. That seems a technicality to me because the amendment is meaningless without the bill to which it's attached. Without the bill, availability would not be reduced. But you add the amendment and availability is reduced. Ergo the amendment is effectively reducing the availability. Reducing availability isn't extending the scope of the Hyde Amendment Of course it is. It dosn't change the rule but extends the scope of the rule to a larger group of women than are currently affected.