Capuano: I was for the House bill, before I was against it

In what the Globe is reporting as a “significant departure” from his statements the past few days, Capuano is now saying that he will vote against the final Health Reform bill if the Stupak amendment remains intact:

Capuano, who voted for the bill in the House on Saturday, had blasted Senate race rival Martha Coakley on Monday for saying that the abortion provision was so unpalatable it was worth sinking the overall package.

But today the Somerville Democrat said that his vote Saturday was merely to advance the legislation so it could be amended later, not an indication of his final political judgment.

“If the bill comes back the same way as it left the House, I would vote against it,” Capuano said in an interview.  “I am a pro-choice person, and I do believe this is [necessary] to provide health care for everyone.”

While some political pundits may have questioned Martha’s campaign strategy for this move (others of us simply saw this as her standing up for the courage of her convictions), this clearly shows that Martha’s presence in this campaign is shaping the debate in a positive, pro-women way.

Updated – in a remarkable contrast to Capuano’s quote in the Globe, the Capuano campaign sent an e-mail this afternoon saying:

Incredibly, Mike’s opponent Martha Coakley says she would have voted against this health care bill – this after claiming she supported a health care bill with a strong public option.

This is an issue we cannot afford to flip-flop on. Too much is at stake, the health and lives of 36 million Americans are affected by this bill.

I have to admit: I agree with Mike.  This is too important of an issue to flip-flop on.  Is he for the final health reform bill – the bill he voted for – that includes the broadest restrictions on funding for abortion since the Hyde Amendment was enacted in 1976?  Or is he against it?