The New York Times has a longish Prescriptions post on the day’s debate on abortion-related amendments to the House of Representatives’ health care reform bill (H.R. 3962). Anne Marie Polak at the Americans United for Life blog summarizes the statements of various Congressmen during the debate on the Stupak-Pitts amendment (the legitimately pro-life amendment). Mary Harned of AUL explains why the Ellsworth amendment is not pro-life and will, in fact, fund abortions. reports that the US Conference of Catholic Bishops says that Rep. Brad Ellsworth’s amendment to the Democratic health care bill, “Creates ‘Money-Laundering System’ for Funding Abortion.”

This morning, the New York Times reported, Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D, Ill) told C-SPAN, “There’s no way at the end of the day we’re going to support these kinds of further restrictions on abortion.” That same report (and says Democrats are hoping that any pro-life language added to the bill can be removed later.

As an analysis by AUL’s Anna Franzonello reminds us, pro-lifers have more concerns with H.R. 3962 than just taxpayer funding of abortion. Language in the law might permit funding of doctor-assisted suicide in Oregon and Washington state and lead other states to implement similar end-of-life provisions by redefining assisted death, H.R. 3962 “affords no conscience protection for health care providers regarding end-of-life concerns,” and it might lead to the “inappropriate use of CER (Comparative Effectiveness Research).”