More

Health Care Reform Produces Win For Abortion Foes

RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR   07/19/10 05:13 PM ET   AP

Health Care Reform Abortion
Health Care Reform Produces Win For Abortion Foes

WASHINGTON — Abortion foes have won a round in the first test of how President Barack Obama's health care law will be applied to the politically charged issue.

Meanwhile, traditional allies of the administration are grumbling about a decision to ban most abortion coverage in insurance pools for those unable to purchase health care on their own.

The Catholic bishops "welcome this new policy," said Cardinal Daniel DiNardo, although he added the organization remains concerned that other parts of the health care overhaul will promote abortion.

NARAL Pro-Choice America called it "inexplicable and wrongheaded."

Abortion politics flared up after at least one state – New Mexico – initially decided to allow coverage of elective abortion in a new federally funded program to provide coverage for high-risk uninsured people turned away by private carriers.

Abortion opponents also raised questions about Pennsylvania and Maryland, but officials in those states denied that their plans would have covered abortions.

Trying to head off more problems, the Health and Human Services Department announced last week the program will not cover abortions except in cases of rape, incest or when the mother's life is in danger – exceptions traditionally allowed under federal law.

That's a more restrictive policy than will be generally applied under Obama's new health care law.

Starting in 2014, the overhaul will allow federally subsidized health insurance plans to cover abortions, but only if policyholders pay for coverage separately and the money is segregated from government funds.

The current program for the high-risk uninsured was also authorized by the health care law, as temporary help for the most vulnerable until the big coverage expansion in 2014. But Congress didn't spell out how to deal with abortion.

Abortion rights supporters say the Obama administration's restrictions go too far.

"We didn't expect that women would be treated differently here with regard to the high-risk insurance pool," said NARAL president Nancy Keenan. "This is inexplicable and wrongheaded to us, and it puts women's lives in jeopardy."

"I think the administration got it wrong," said Jessica Arons, director of women's health at the Center for American Progress, a liberal public policy institute. "They have imposed a ban on abortion coverage in the high-risk pools and nothing in the law requires that action."

The turnabout comes amid growing recognition among Democrats that the nation's unsettled political climate could cost them control of the House in the fall elections. The health care law remains a powerful motivator for opponents of Obama's policies, and no issue stirs deeper passions than abortion.

After abortion foes raised questions about the program for the uninsured, leading congressional Republicans jumped on the attack. They accused Obama of steering millions in federal funds to pay for abortions, breaking a promise he made when he signed an executive order that reaffirmed long-standing federal restrictions.

Anti-abortion Democrats in Congress – whose votes provided the margin for passage of the health care law – scrambled to respond.

Several of them said the administration's ultimate decision proves that Obama's executive order has teeth. The president signed the order as part of a negotiation to get anti-abortion Democrats in the House to vote for the overhaul bill, and HHS invoked it in laying out the restrictions.

"This is the first test, and it will show that there is no federal funding going to pay for abortion," said Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper, D-Pa., a first-term lawmaker seeking re-election from a Republican-leaning district.

Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., a leader of anti-abortion Democrats in the House, said the administration's action should ease fears that the health care law would open a spigot of federal funding for abortion.

"New Mexico is an example of where the executive order actually worked," Stupak said, referring to that state's reversal on allowing coverage of elective abortion. "They have made it very clear abortions are not going to be covered."

The Preexisting Condition Insurance Plan, launched earlier this month, will provide coverage to uninsured people turned down by private carriers because of a medical problem. Premiums vary by state but are roughly comparable to those paid by healthy people. Applications are being taken and coverage is expected to begin Aug. 1.

Douglas Johnson, legislative director for National Right to Life, an anti-abortion group, acknowledged that his side had won a round.

"If they now do what they say they are going to do, that would be good," Johnson said of the Obama administration. "But in our view they are doing it because the spotlight has been put on them and we blew the whistle."

___

Online:

Health and Human Services statement

http://tinyurl.com/249qx5k

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
Filed by Elyse Siegel  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 2,138
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (19 total)
  1 of 9  
COMMUNITY PUNDITS
photo
MathIsTruth 10:48 AM on 07/19/2010
One (of many) ironies is that one way or another, health insurance will be covering these cases. The choice is whether it's going to be expensive or inexpensive, safe for the mother or not safe for the mother.

If a woman is forced to give birth, the insurance providers will then be forced to cover the costs of the pregnancy, delivery, and all the health care costs of the child.

Of  Read More...
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:27 PM on 07/20/2010
However, i also disagree strongly with those opposed to contraception and agree we should put more time effort and money into helping those who are poor and struggling who have kids. Not by simply giving them money, though, but helping prepare them to live in the modern world and earn a living. We should be encouraging pregancies to occur later, not earlier, improve education, training for real jobs, etc.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
beingthebest
try as I might, I'm only human
05:33 PM on 07/20/2010
In all this, we agree. You would find that most women want to work and support their families, if given the opportunities. However, if my life is at risk, or I have been raped, or my father spent years abusing me, there is nothing you could ever do to convince me to carry that baby and put an unborn child ahead of my life. What most men don't realize (and I have had a child so I have more experience than any man) is the mental and physical impact carrying a child causes. I can't imagine carrying the child of my rapist or father or the child I know has a good chance of killing me. Some women have, and bless them, most women I know couldn't
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:25 PM on 07/20/2010
Talk about anti women/


"women-too dumb to control their # of pregnancies with modern techniques."

"Women-too irresponsible to pay for the abortions they choose."


"women-let's continue to allow men to brow beat them into abortions"

real pro women there.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
MatthewRobertson
I'm 26. I'm gay. I like film. I care about shit.
04:55 PM on 07/20/2010
What a strawman.
12:44 PM on 07/20/2010
What it the Obama administration's plan for unwanted, unadopted children in the US? How dare they spend so much time on the issue of abortion - and zero on all the children that remain unadopted because their parent had to have them when they were unwanted? Don't those children deserve more attention than abortion rules? I guess NOT, according to Obama, his HHS Secretary, and the righties
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
beingthebest
try as I might, I'm only human
12:38 PM on 07/20/2010
You worried about your money being used for death, then read this and weep
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/top-secret-america/
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:07 PM on 07/20/2010
If removing funding reduces the number of unnecessary abortions, then I am all for it. Abortion can be a necessary evil, but it is used far to often as simple birth control.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
beingthebest
try as I might, I'm only human
12:47 PM on 07/20/2010
So women who might die in childbirth should have to die so we cut down on a few teens who use it for birth control. Women who have money can live. Maybe what we are all saying is a women's life is worth as much as she owns and no more.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:53 PM on 07/20/2010
You clearly don't understand the difference between necessary and unnecessary do you?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:07 PM on 07/20/2010
It's really too bad that there are so many people like you who don't live in the real world and see every issue in black and white terms.

By reducing "unnecessary" abortion, you are supporting many things, among them:

Causing people who can't afford abortion to have unwanted babies they can't afford;

Supporting back alley abortion-you didn't really think it's gone away, did you?

And many others. Just because a very very few women use the right to privacy in their medical care to use abortion as what you call birth control.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:51 PM on 07/20/2010
"very very few" you are fooling yourself. BTW, birth control is far cheaper than a baby, its simple math. You just need to use a few brain cells before you use your reproductive organs.
photo
Ametista
Biologist and unrepentant leftist
11:57 AM on 07/20/2010
As long as there are unwanted pregnancies there will be abortions, illegal or not. If you want it illegalized then I suggest you hand pick two of your young female friends and tell them that they get the dea_th-by-coathanger option you have left them with.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:15 PM on 07/20/2010
How about women actually take responsibility for the body they are so proud to call their own. You blame men for getting you pregnant, and take no responsibility for yourselves. It's your body, your choice right? No its your body your responsibility, protect it from pregnancy. You control what goes into it. Its no secret how babies are made. If you don't want a baby, take action before hand, there is no reason coathangers should even be involved. You don't see guys getting a choice after the fact do you? Nope, they have to financially be the daddy whether they want to or not. They are held responsible for their actions before conception, why shouldn't women be?
photo
Ametista
Biologist and unrepentant leftist
12:21 PM on 07/20/2010
I know many women who have had birth control fail. One had an abusive boyfriend who had recently started beating her. She aborted and moved out of state without him ever knowing. Two others were heavy drinkers and would have birthed retarded kids. It fails, thats the problem. Maybe if MEN were on birth control ALSO there wouldn't be nearly so many accidents!
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
beingthebest
try as I might, I'm only human
12:44 PM on 07/20/2010
I have never in my life placed full blame on a man. Nor have I ever expected a man to provide (as I feel they have just as much choice) That being said, when I was young and had an abortion, I thought long and hard about it and made the best choice for me and any child I brought into the world. When older and more stable, I had a child as a single parent because the father chose not to participate. That child is now 25, educated and contributing to society. The mother knows best what is best for her and her child.
Women are taking responsibility. It may not be what you like, but the greater responsibility is making the hard choices when something happens. Stuff happens. Deny it all you want, but Bristol will tell ya it is so.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
beingthebest
try as I might, I'm only human
11:53 AM on 07/20/2010
When these conversations come up I see red, and although I try to back away, I can't. So here goes...
Money - My best friend died at 16 in 1965 from a back alley abortion. Do you know how much money it cost YOU to call the ambulance, have the Doctors try and stop the bleeding and watching her die. Do you know how much money it costs YOU to have a child in the system for 16 years because none of you are going to adopt anything but lily white newborns.
Morals - Don't even get me started. You talk about the sanctity of life but once that child is born you will do everything to make sure it doesn't have a chance. You call their parents welfare bums and watch the cycle get repeated and repeated. People cheer at the politicians who says if you have repeatedly been raped by your father you should make lemonade from the lemons. That fact is that you cry about the sancity of life and you don't give one d a m n about the actual born and breathing women.
You cry about big government and yet have to problem with a government that can decide what I do with my body.
Insurance- Let me explain insurance to you. If I get an abortion, YOU will not be paying all by your little old self. It is a pool of money. I have to pay for your wars.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
beingthebest
try as I might, I'm only human
12:09 PM on 07/20/2010
Continued.

I have to pay for your wars. I have to watch mothers and fathers deal with the death of a son they spent 20 years raising because Bush decided to illegal invade a country. We are still paying trillions. TRILLIONS.
photo
Ametista
Biologist and unrepentant leftist
12:24 PM on 07/20/2010
My great grandmother died the same way and her children were raised by a very abusive wi tch. But see, it has been too long, and people forgot what it was like. Mothers used to die all the time, as did many teenagers. And it will happen again, if its illegalized.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:16 PM on 07/20/2010
They died because they broke the law. Developing human life has been killed in the millions since abortion has been allowed across the board. I dont necessarily see one as worse than the other.
11:17 AM on 07/20/2010
I don't understand any thing in this comment. But this is not hateful comment like thousands of comments posted here by people of tolerance.

达赖喇嘛再次与中国网友进行族群对话
达赖喇嘛

达赖喇嘛对通过新技术进行交流感到乐观

在印度的西藏流亡精神达赖喇嘛回答中国网民提问时表示,希望即使在他圆寂后西藏流亡组织仍然继续运作和发展,西藏问题要由民主产生的领导人决定。

达赖喇嘛在7月19日通过社交网站推特同中国网友对话是第二次此类对话,上次对话在5月进行。达赖喇嘛同中国网友的两次网络对话都是由中国独立作家和博客作者王力雄协调进行的。

达赖喇嘛承认,他提出的中间道路温和主张受到“藏青会”及其他一些藏人团体的批评,而且批评声音有增无减。但他对中国网民说,百分之九十九的人仍然信赖非暴力的和平路线。

针对中国网友提出关于“大西藏”的问题,达赖喇嘛说“大西藏”(或大藏区)“这个词是中共统战部等反贴在我们头上的。”

他重申,藏人的诉求是,语言、文字同一的所有藏人,需要有保护、发扬宗教文化的同等权利,以及经济发展等方面的平等权利。他说其实中共似乎承认了这一点,即对西藏自治区及其他四省的藏区的经济发展要统一政策。

在对话前王力雄征集并整理了网友的问题,并通过网络表决对问题进行了筛选,然后提交达赖喇嘛。

对话前向中文网友致词时,达赖喇嘛对推特和谷歌提供的网络交流途径等技术进步感到乐观,他说这种技术进步促进了交流和真理的显现。
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
beingthebest
try as I might, I'm only human
12:12 PM on 07/20/2010
What does the Dali Lama have to do with this thread?
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
LeftLeanWing
RightKickFoot
11:06 AM on 07/20/2010
"I think the administration got it wrong," said Jessica Arons, director of women's health at the Center for American Progress, a liberal public policy institute.

"They have imposed a ban on abortion coverage in the high-risk pools and nothing in the law requires that action."

-------------------

She Think THIS ADMINISTRATION GOT IT WRONG ?

You can blame Joe Stupak .....and his anti Abortion Coalition..... !

Why does everyone blame everything they don't like about legislation on Obama himself.. and not put in squarely ON THE LEGISLATORS who pushed for it . ?

Should OBAMA have threatened a Veto over this matter and End Up With Nothing ?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:17 PM on 07/20/2010
apparently people here think so.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
beingthebest
try as I might, I'm only human
10:31 AM on 07/20/2010
Whenever the subject of abortion come up, I have to turn to the guidance of George Carlin
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvF1Q3UidWM&feature=player_embedded
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DevonTexas
Eternal Optimism
10:15 AM on 07/20/2010
"coverage of elective abortion in a new federally funded program to provide coverage for high-risk uninsured people turned away by private carriers"

If these are high-risk cases to begin with, then it's likely an abortion would be necessary to save the life of the mother. Unless, of course, your idea of "life" applies only to a fetus and not to human beings.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
beingthebest
try as I might, I'm only human
11:56 AM on 07/20/2010
It does, a living breathing women who might die in childbirth is of no concern to them.
photo
Ametista
Biologist and unrepentant leftist
11:59 AM on 07/20/2010
Well of course. These people don't consider knocked up teenage girls people, they consider them who res.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
hardcoremama
me. life. kids. wife. photos.
10:07 AM on 07/20/2010
So the bottom line w/the new healthcare policy is: Should the government pay for abortions? Yes, but with some restrictions. If a woman voluntarily choses to have an abortion (think in the same terms as cosmetic surgery, which is not always a medical need, why should the government be responible to cover the costs of the prodcedure?) She should pay for it out of pocket, that is a personal choice that person has made for their life. I do think the government should pay or help w/the costs if there has been rape, incest, mother's life is in danger or medical reasons. I know women that have had abortions, its not an easy decision, but they all said that they paid for it with their own money to keep other people out of their business. I think the government should treat this issue the same way. If you voluntarily choose to have an abortion, you pay for it out of pocket.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:10 AM on 07/20/2010
"Should the government pay for abortions?"

The government doesn't pay for anything, and the taxpayers pay for everything.

"If you voluntarily choose to have an abortion, you pay for it out of pocket. "

I don't think forced abortions are commonplace.

"Everyone wants to live at the expense of the state. They forget that the state wants to live at the expense of everyone."

-- Bastiat
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
beingthebest
try as I might, I'm only human
11:23 AM on 07/20/2010
And if you are poor, heaven help you, you don't deserve what the well off can pay for
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:16 AM on 07/20/2010
Its really easy to avoid pregancy. that's the funny thing/ Not to mention, you should be usng condoms to avoid sexually transmitted diseases anyway.

and if you cant count on him to support the child, perhaps you shouldnt be having sex with him.

The weird thing is, with all this talk of "antichoice men" controlling women, many many abortions are done because the man insists or refuses to support the child or in the hope that he will stick around. For those women, they are truly being controlled.

Women, you gotta pick better men.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CJWebber
09:38 AM on 07/20/2010
Only a man would say 'it's really easy to avoid pregnancy'.
10:43 AM on 07/20/2010
It is. Ask the millions and millions of people who do it every single day.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
LeftLeanWing
RightKickFoot
11:07 AM on 07/20/2010
Yeah.... skrew that !
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DevonTexas
Eternal Optimism
10:16 AM on 07/20/2010
Life is so simple for some people. We call them "simple people".
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:05 AM on 07/20/2010
Those people rely too much on emotion and too little on logic.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:05 AM on 07/20/2010
I support the right of men to kill newborns to get out of child support payments. that's an exercise in choice right there.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:09 AM on 07/20/2010
Don't you know, the right to choose, is for women only. Men don't get to choose. So all these prochoice women are only for choice so long as its their choice, not yours.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
beingthebest
try as I might, I'm only human
12:53 PM on 07/20/2010
Try talking to a few women sometime before deciding what we all think.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:11 AM on 07/20/2010
I detect a hint of sarcasm :)
07:50 AM on 07/20/2010
A lot of anti abortion protesters are old women who can't have kids,infertile women or men of whom some are raving lunatics.It's none of your business interfering with any woman's right to chose.You don't want an abortion do not have one.

The catholic church,one of the major proponents of these garbage protests,have no problem hiding and excusing their pedophile priests..quite ironic don't cha think......Palin?..What am I saying that word is to big for her.

Now I realize who she was referring to with her hopey,feely,squeezy garbage talk.What an ignoramus.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:03 AM on 07/20/2010
It becomes people's business when taxpayers are asked to pay for it. Do what you want if you dont come to other people for the money.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DAVROS1
10:05 AM on 07/20/2010
Bogus argument. If I dont agree with war and the killing that takes place as part of war, but my taxes still have to pay for that. And in war, actual, real humans are being killed.
And, I might also suggest that since, for the most part, objections to abortion are based on religious convictions, they have no place at all in public policy.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:10 AM on 07/20/2010
A very slippery slope that. For example: What did you have for dinner? As a tax payer I reserve the right to withhold any HC services if I don't like your unhealthy choice.