Strict Abortion Provision Included In House Health Care Bill

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Strict Abortion Provision Included In House Health Care Bill stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

ERICA WERNER | 11/ 8/09 04:24 AM | AP

What's Your Reaction?
Pelosi

WASHINGTON — A bipartisan House coalition voted Saturday to prohibit coverage of abortions in a new government-run health care plan that Democrats would establish to compete with private insurers.

The 240-194 vote on an amendment by Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., was a blow to liberals, who would have allowed the Obama administration and its successors to decide whether abortions would be covered by the government plan. Sixty-four Democrats joined 176 Republicans in favor of the prohibition.

Stupak's measure also would bar anyone getting federal health subsidies from purchasing private insurance polices that included abortion coverage.

"Let us stand together on principle – no public funding for abortions, no public funding for insurance policies that pay for abortions," Stupak urged fellow lawmakers before the vote.

The amendment would bar the new government insurance plan from covering abortions, except in cases of rape, incest, or where the life of the mother is in danger. The Democrats' original legislation would have allowed the government plan to cover abortions, if the Health and Human Services secretary decided it should.

The amendment also would prohibit people who receive new federal health subsidies from buying insurance plans that include abortion coverage.

The Democrats' original bill would have allowed people getting federal subsidies to pay for abortion coverage with their own money. Abortion opponents dismissed that as an accounting gimmick.

Abortion rights advocates called the measure the biggest setback to women's reproductive rights in decades. Anti-abortion Democrats forced House leaders to bring it up for a vote by threatening to oppose the underlying bill, and efforts to reach a compromise fell apart Friday night.

Story continues below
advertisement

"Like it or not, this is a legal medical procedure and we should respect those who need to make this very personal decision," said Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo.

Some Republicans considered voting "present" in hopes that might unravel support for the underlying health care bill among anti-abortion Democrats, but only one did, Rep. John Shadegg, R-Ariz.

"If I felt that the (health overhaul) bill could be killed by not advancing the Stupak amendment then it seems it would be prudent to vote in such a way that wouldn't advance the bill, but it doesn't appear that that's a possibility," Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., said before the vote.

The National Right to Life Committee and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops lobbied lawmakers in both parties on the abortion measure. The bishops said they would oppose the bill if it lacked a strict prohibition on any federal funding for abortions.

Stupak's language applies to policies sold in a federally regulated insurance exchange that would be set up in 2013. The overhaul bill envisions both private companies and the government offering policies in the exchange.

Under the Stupak amendment, people who do not receive federal insurance subsidies could buy private insurance plans in the exchange that include abortion coverage. People who receive federal subsidies could buy separate policies covering only abortions if they use only their own money to do it.

Companies selling insurance policies covering abortions would be required to offer identical policies without the abortion coverage.

Abortion-rights supporters say private insurers will not likely offer policies with abortion coverage in the exchange because many potential buyers will be getting federal subsidies and therefore wouldn't be able to purchase them.

Around 21 million people are expected to get coverage through the exchange by 2019, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The majority of Americans who get their insurance coverage from their employers would not be affected.

Abortion-rights supporters say the restrictions in the amendment go further than current law.

A law called the Hyde amendment – which must be renewed annually – bars federal funding for abortion except in cases of rape, incest or if the mother's life is in danger. The restrictions apply to Medicaid, forcing states that cover abortions for low-income women to pay for them with state revenues. Separate laws apply the restrictions to the federal employee health plan and the military.

Currently abortion coverage is widely available in the private market. A Guttmacher Institute study found that 87 percent of typical employer plans covered abortion in 2002. A Kaiser Family Foundation survey in 2003 found that 46 percent of workers in employer plans had abortion coverage. The studies asked different questions, which might help explain the disparity in the results.

Abortions in the first trimester typically cost between $350-$900, according to Planned Parenthood.

A health overhaul bill pending in the Senate also bars federal funding for abortion, but the language is less stringent. Discrepancies between the House and Senate measures would have to be reconciled before any final bill is passed.

(This version corrects the third paragraph to correct the description of the amendment – people getting subsidies could not buy insurance packages covering abortion, instead of people could not get subsidies to buy abortion coverage.)

WASHINGTON — A bipartisan House coalition voted Saturday to prohibit coverage of abortions in a new government-run health care plan that Democrats would establish to compete with private insurer...
WASHINGTON — A bipartisan House coalition voted Saturday to prohibit coverage of abortions in a new government-run health care plan that Democrats would establish to compete with private insurer...
Loading...
 
Report Corrections
 
Comments
3211
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo
Post Comment

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (34 pages total)
- weyah I'm a Fan of weyah 2 fans permalink

If one group of citizens can decide they don't want their tax dollars used for an activity that is considered LEGAL, where does it end? If anti-abortion people get to pick and choose, why can't everyone? Anti-war protesters can refuse to have their tax dollars pay for wars they feel are unjust and illegal. Those opposed to the death penalty--they get a refund with every execution. Greenpeacers can pocket money that would have gone to corporations that pollute. And it goes on and on.

Pretty soon, once we've bowed to all the special interests, there will be no tax dollars available for anything. Or we'll have a tax code that has a series of check boxes, "I want my tax money to pay for..."

What makes the abortion issue such a special case? And if they get to get away with it, the rest of us should start demanding the same consideration.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:59 PM on 11/10/2009

The government should not expend tax dollars for anything other than what is prescribed for it to spend on in the consitution. The only way to stop the run away spending in Washington is to stop funding it---stop paying taxes. Abortionistas tell us abortion is a decision. Health care coverage is also a decision. I have the right to kill an unborn child but I don't have the right to choose the treatment I need or where to get it? What we need most is for Nancy Pelosi and Harry reid to become the poster children for retro-active abortion.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:15 PM on 11/16/2009
- nana4g I'm a Fan of nana4g 105 fans permalink

Does the American Conference of Bishops have a vote in Congress? Who cares that they do not support the original bill that respects the Hyde Amendment? They also made a public statement over the summer that "healthcare was not a responsibility of government", that it should be a charitable enterprise.

Time to remove their tax shelter status since they are nothing more than one big lobbying firm.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:35 AM on 11/10/2009

Respect women.
Keep abortion safe and legal.
And 100% covered by health insurance.
This is a deeply personal and private issue.
Get the right wing religious cretins out of politics altogether.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:06 AM on 11/10/2009
- cleffnote I'm a Fan of cleffnote 5 fans permalink
photo

So who are the Republicans now investing in wire clothes hangers? Follow the money. What a bunch of jerks. Congress, you are failing your constituents.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:49 AM on 11/10/2009
- Artemis34 I'm a Fan of Artemis34 133 fans permalink
photo

For the guy who says women control access to sex:

Approximately 15% to 25% of women ... were sexually abused when they were girls.

Most sexual abuse offenders are acquainted with their victims; approximately 30% are relatives of the child, most often brothers, fathers, uncles or cousins; around 60% are other acquaintances [the priest, the bishop]...

This is the kind of world the bishops have in mind for us
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/05/brazil-girl-9-has-abortio_n_172273.html
Girl, 9, Has Abortion Despite Church's Objections

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:25 PM on 11/09/2009
- LeFlaneur I'm a Fan of LeFlaneur 26 fans permalink

My previous rant won't get posted, so let me rephrase. After all the reworking of this bill, I now think they've effectively ruined it. Thank you.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:55 PM on 11/09/2009
- smi2le I'm a Fan of smi2le 2 fans permalink

What about a rider terminating diplomatic relations between the U.S. and Vatican City, as we do if any other country so blatantly and frequently interfered in our domestic political affairs.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:39 PM on 11/09/2009
- dgr I'm a Fan of dgr permalink

How about a policy of not allowing posts from religious bigots.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:31 PM on 11/09/2009
- LeFlaneur I'm a Fan of LeFlaneur 26 fans permalink

The path forward, out of this mess we're in is so clear... so clear. A bright future, clean air and water, people with easy access to health care who no longer live in fear. It's all so possible. It's within reach. Why do our elected officials prevent this from happening when it's all so obvious? Why are so many people against the things that would make their lives better? The fearmongers, the xenophobes, the gluttons, ignoramuses, the religious delusionals, why do they have the power? They poison everything good. They destroy anything beautiful. Sometimes I get on this page and I try to make reasoned points, or I try to be funny. Now I'm just consumed by rage. We who are peaceful, who care for our fellow human being, who only want to live in a decent world -- why must we always remain under the boots of the ignorant? Go on then. Light the whole damn thing on fire. Burn it all down and be done with it.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:36 PM on 11/09/2009
- NYkid I'm a Fan of NYkid 8 fans permalink
photo

The abortion clause is no big deal compared to the health care reform.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:35 PM on 11/09/2009
- nana4g I'm a Fan of nana4g 105 fans permalink

It is a big deal if women are mandated to purchase healtcare coverage and that healthcare coverage discriminates against them and removes Choice. Senator Sessions made a remark that "women are like smokers" and their health care needs expend too many resources.­....so, I say we should remove coverage that treats erectile dysfunction for all men not diagnosed with Diabetes Type I, because the availability of devices, medications, surgeries that men engage in to keep an aging appendage functioning into their 90s consumes far too many resources that just are used to impregnate women and keep those men happy.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:38 AM on 11/10/2009
- Philclock I'm a Fan of Philclock 37 fans permalink
photo

Yeah, right. Just like illegal immigrants can't get health care now.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:22 PM on 11/09/2009
- manyamile I'm a Fan of manyamile 17 fans permalink
photo

1.educatio­n and contraception( for women/couples who want to prevent/delay pregnancy) is most cost effective
2.in cases where contraception fails, abortion, especially first trimester, is still less expensive , medically , than preand post natal care, delivery, and childrearing.
3.I think education and gyn care reduces costs, reduces # of unwanted pregnancies, encourages and allows earlier decisions regarding pregnancy,(fewer late term abortions)­..and of course provides care for women who choose childbirth.
This is one area where insurers , healthcare professionals and rational women agree.
so how did this get so far off track?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:20 PM on 11/09/2009

I completely agree. Plus, if this is what it took to get the reform, then so be it. It is called compromise, people.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:15 PM on 11/09/2009
- nana4g I'm a Fan of nana4g 105 fans permalink

These same people, these loybbyists, the Catholic Church, is against all artificial contraception.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:39 AM on 11/10/2009
- roger37 I'm a Fan of roger37 21 fans permalink

Here you go, folks. The hand of C-Street Power Religion Christers has finally become overt.

If you don't know what I'm referring to, read "The Family" by Jeff Sharlet. Big-time scary.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:17 PM on 11/09/2009

Don't forget the power of the Roman Catholic bishops and the medical care provided by their institutions.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:23 PM on 11/09/2009
- jrutle I'm a Fan of jrutle 42 fans permalink

The anti-abortion amendment appears to be much more the work of C St fundamentalists than the Catholic bishops. 26 conservative Dems voted against the health care bill after voting for the abortion amendment. Useless through and through.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:40 PM on 11/09/2009

Hey, do you remember how much your last abortion cost? Is this range provided by the Wiki respondents correct ($200-1200)?:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_does_an_abortion_and_birth_control_pills_cost

How much is co-pay for surgery through an HMO?

This Blue Cross plan says co-pay for outpatient surgery is $400:

http://www.ehealthinsurance.com/ehi/PlanBenefitDetails.ds?cid=15107600&pid=3

Is this about right? Can you recall how much you paid as a co-pay for your abortion?

Can never trust the internet. Would love to hear from posters.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:58 PM on 11/09/2009
- Angrygrrl I'm a Fan of Angrygrrl 4 fans permalink

I agree with everyone who is outraged, angry or just annoyed.
I never had to have an abortion, but support all women and their rights over their own body.
I love men, but not the ones who want to restrict what is already the law of the land.
...I have an idea...let­'s pass legislation that goes farther and spreads the gender bias
...No public funds for Viagra, no public funds for vasectomie­s...unless they too buy "Viagra or Vasectomy Private Insurance". How's that?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:22 PM on 11/09/2009
photo

240 voted for this? Now you see the terrible consequences of 240 uncommitted abortions.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:01 PM on 11/09/2009

lolololol
yes yes yes

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:13 PM on 11/09/2009
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (34 pages total)

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect