U.S. Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper voted for health-care reform in November after co-sponsoring an amendment that restricted abortion funding.

But how will the freshman lawmaker from Erie vote a second time when the House gets the Senate version of the bill with less restrictive abortion language?

Despite some media reports suggesting Dahlkemper would be a "no'' vote, Dahlkemper's spokeswoman said it's too early to put her vote in either column.

The House could get the Senate bill as early as next week.

"She was opposed to the Senate abortion language. Period,'' her spokeswoman, Marie Francis, said.

But Francis couldn't say how Dahlkemper would vote a second time, and Dahlkemper, D-3rd Dist., wasn't available for comment. Francis said Thursday that she is busy with House business.

"It's unclear what else is going to come forward with that health-care bill. There might be some accompanying legislation. There might be some changes to the bill itself,'' Francis said.

"Until we know what it is the congresswoman is going to have the opportunity to vote on, (she) can't say how she'll vote,'' Francis said.

Dahlkemper is an anti-abortion legislator who hasn't changed her stance on the issue that has threatened to derail health-care reform.

But the congresswoman is not commenting on "hypothetical language or hypothetical legislative strategies,'' Francis said.

Dahlkemper could be in a tough spot, especially in an election year.

She faces scrutiny from House leadership as it counts votes, but pressure from anti-abortion activists. A poll commissioned by an anti-abortion group, the Susan B. Anthony List, indicated strong opposition in the 3rd District to taxpayer-funded abortions as part of health-care reform.

Dahlkemper and other lawmakers co-sponsored an amendment written by Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich. that put a prohibition on paying for abortion with federal money.

Dahlkemper said in a prior interview that the amendment would maintain the current law that bans federal funds from being used to pay for abortions except for rape, incest or to save the life of the mother.

The Senate in December replaced it with wording that Stupak considers unacceptable.

The Senate language would allow health plans getting federal subsidies in a new insurance marketplace to cover abortion, as long as they pay for it with money collected from policyholders.

The House bill would have prohibited health plans getting subsidies from covering abortions.

Under the current plan, the House would approve the Senate-passed bill. Both chambers then would immediately approve a second bill, making changes in the first measure before both could take effect.

The second bill would be debated under rules that bar a filibuster.

The region's other congressman, U.S. Rep. Glenn Thompson, of Centre County, R-5th Dist., is opposed to abortion rights, too. But, like all other Republicans, he said he'll vote against the health-care bill regardless of whether the House or Senate abortion language is used.

"I see it as one of the many significant flaws in the Senate bill that will be coming to the House,'' he said.

Thompson called it "a bad piece of legislation'' that starts imposing taxes in 2011 while benefits don't start until 2014 and makes cuts to Medicare. Those are just some of his disagreements with the plan.

Thompson said he supports improving the nation's health-care system.

"We should do everything we can to bring down the cost of health care for all Americans, improve access to quality health care, improve quality overall and strengthen the decision-making relationship between patient and physician,'' he said.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.


Read the Campaign '10 blog at GoErie.com/blogs/campaign10 and post comments.