Democratic Senator Ben Nelson and Republican Senator Orrin Hatch have filed their pro-life amendment today, and rumors circulate that the Senate could vote on it tomorrow. The amendment is an attempt to do to the Senate Bill what the Stupak-Pitts Amendment did to the House bill; ban federal funding of abortion except in the cases of Life, Rape, and Incest in both the Public Option and in subsidized insurance programs.

So it’d be a good idea to get on the horn to your two Senators and urge them to vote for the amendment.

To be honest, it’s a tough challenge to get this amendment passed in the Senate, it’s just not as pro-life as the House. But it’s not completely outside the realm of possibility.

I was intrigued to see the Heritage Foundation’s Blog “The Foundry,” post on this. Heritage, the big name Conservative think tank, normally doesn’t do much with Abortion, they have a reputation as more of a Foreign/Fiscal Policy outfit. That they’re jumping on this kind of gives lie, I think, to the notion circulated by some moderate Republicans (e.g. David Frum an company) that abortion is a drag of an issue to the Republican party. And it’s always gratifying to have one more allied voice for pro-lifers.

The Heritage post notes that, tactically speaking, getting a pro-life amendment into Health Care legislation would be another big stumbling block for liberal Democrats:

Once Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) files the Nelson-Hatch amendment, pro-abortion Senators in the Democratic caucus like Claire McCaskill (D-MO) will have a difficult decision to make: Do they vote for cloture, ending debate, and allowing an up-or-down vote on the Nelson-Hatch amendment, or do they vote for a filibuster? If they end debate and allow the vote, it is likely, maybe even probable, that 51 other Senators will vote in favor of the taxpayer-abortion-funding ban.

Once the abortion funding ban is in the bill, it will be next to impossible for pro-abortion forces to get it out. They will be in the same exact position House progressives were when Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) forced them to accept the Stupak language or lose Obamacare entirely. Progressives in the House completely caved the first time around, but more strident pro-abortion members like Rep. Diana DeGette (D-CO) have promised that the second time they will stand up for their principles and vote down any Obamacare bill that contains any Stupak like language.

But even if DeGette and McCaskill get their way and Obamacare does allow taxpayer dollars to pay for elective abortions, then pro-life House Democrats may end up voting against the bill. No matter what happens with the Nelson-Hatch Amendment in the Senate, the abortion issue may complicate the roadmap to a signing ceremony for those who desire Obamacare.

Strong pro-life amendments could put the hard core progressives in a bind, similar to the one they’re already facing with the Public Option. More evidence that getting pro-life language into Health Care isn’t just the responsible and correct policy decision, it’s something worth supporting for anyone who doesn’t want the final bill to pass.