iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Planned Parenthood Gets Support From Feds In Indiana Defunding Case

Planned Parenthood Funding Indiana

KEN KUSMER   06/16/11 10:26 PM ET   AP

INDIANAPOLIS — The U.S. Justice Department entered the court battle over a tough new Indiana abortion law that disqualifies Planned Parenthood of Indiana from the Medicaid program, siding with the organization in its request Thursday for a court order blocking the statute as unconstitutional.

In a brief filed electronically after the close of business, Justice Department attorneys said U.S. District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt should grant Planned Parenthood's request for an injunction because it blocks Medicaid recipients' freedom to choose the provider of their choice. The law signed May 10 by Republican Gov. Mitch Daniels cuts off Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood because the organization provides abortions.

"The public interest strongly supports preserving the freedom of choice that Congress conferred," the brief said.

It was unclear how the last-minute filing would affect the timing of Pratt's ruling. She has said she intended to rule by July 1.

Planned Parenthood attorney Ken Falk said the brief caught him by surprise.

"I had no idea this was coming," Falk told The Associated Press Thursday evening.

The brief was consistent with earlier actions by federal administrators for Medicaid, the state-federal health insurance program for low-income and disabled people. Medicaid Administrator Donald Berwick sent a letter to his Indiana counterpart on June 1 saying federal law states beneficiaries can obtain general health services from any qualified provider and the mere fact that Planned Parenthood performs abortions separately does not disqualify it.

Indiana Solicitor General Thomas Fisher, in a final brief filed earlier this week, said the Berwick letter was not final and authoritative because Indiana can appeal his decision. Indiana opposes the injunction because even though Medicaid doesn't pay for abortions in most cases, the program may provide indirect funding by subsidizing some of Planned Parenthood's overhead costs.

However, the Justice Department brief said the letter was indeed authoritative because the Department of Health and Human Services, which administers the Medicaid program, was applying its "longstanding interpretation of the complex and technical Medicaid statute" with the letter, which rejected changes to Indiana's Medicaid plan to account for the new state law.

"HHS has long taken the position that a State's criteria for qualification must be related to the provider's ability to render services and properly bill for those services," the 23-page brief said.

Email and telephone messages were left for Fisher on Thursday night seeking comment on the brief.

The law cuts off about $1.4 million in Medicaid funding to Planned Parenthood, money the organization says it needs the money to provide cancer screens and other general health services to 9,300 Medicaid clients, both men and women, served by its 28 health centers across Indiana.

Falk and Fisher have agreed as much as $5.3 billion in total Medicaid funding to the state could be at risk since Berwick rejected the changes in Indiana's state Medicaid plan. Indiana had 60 days from June 1 to appeal his decision.

___

AP writer Ken Kusmer can be reached at . http://twitter.com/kkusmer

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
INDIANAPOLIS — The U.S. Justice Department entered the court battle over a tough new Indiana abortion law that disqualifies Planned Parenthood of Indiana from the Medicaid program, siding with t...
INDIANAPOLIS — The U.S. Justice Department entered the court battle over a tough new Indiana abortion law that disqualifies Planned Parenthood of Indiana from the Medicaid program, siding with t...
Filed by Elyse Siegel  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 230
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
hornedcog
Tax Tea Now!
09:30 PM on 06/21/2011
Historically, states have allowed slavery.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jane Ellis
07:55 PM on 06/21/2011
I find it interesting that a party that so vehemently states we need less government interference, believes we should be allowed freedoms to make our own way in life (entrepreneurship) is so quick to decry death with dignity laws and believes it is their G-d given right to meddle in a woman's right to choose what she does with her body. Actually, I find this attitude it just a few short steps from the burkas and taking away women's drivers licenses.
07:43 PM on 06/21/2011
Planned Parenthood deals with ALL reproductive issues. They don't pick and choose and base the treatment they offer on some religious doctrine. They don't judge the patient. They don't bury their heads in the sand and pretend sex isn't natural.

On the other hand, the GOP is a bunch of immature very judgemental hypocrits who want total control and would turn this country into a theocracy in a heartbeat. I'm sure our governor will be pulling the same crap shortly and I WILL be marching on Austin.
photo
3RawBob
My Bible: the Jefferson Bible
02:12 PM on 06/17/2011
Letter I would love to see :


August 2, 2011
Dear Governor Mitch Daniels:
HHS has reviewed your appeal and found it without merit. Consequently, as outlined in previous correspondence, all Medicare funding for the State of Indiana is terminated immediately. This health cost of $14.5M per day ($5.3B annually) is now the responsibility of the state, and will not be eligible for reimbursement from the Federal Medicaid program.
Federal payments will be reinstated upon the state rescinding the new abortion law that disqualifies Planned Parenthood of Indiana from the Medicaid program.
Sincerely,
Kathleen Sebelius
HHS Secretary
photo
DTOM1776
Veritas Liberabit Vos
02:59 PM on 06/17/2011
Greetings 3RawBob

And the letter in reply would go a little something like this:

Dear Secretary Sebelius

If federal funding is dependent on our state sanctioning the killing of innocent human life simply because it is in the way, then you may keep your funding. Here in our state, we can't really put a "price" on the life of a human. Maybe you can, but, we won't.

Sincerely
Mitch Daniels
08:56 PM on 06/21/2011
You are wrong, wrong, wrong! You just want to be able to control
the lives of women. Especially horrendous is the desire to allow
women and babies at risk to die because they will not be allowed to
be saved. You say you have the concern of the unborn babies at heart, but you do not and you have no concern for the lives of the Mother's.

You are telling women that if they become pregnant they have no further right
to life.. Of course, if it lives, (and that is not also in doubt), you will care nothing about the future of the child. Please do not try to tell me that these cases are rare,
nor don't try to tell me that the law does not refer to these cases. It does. You also care nothing about the woman or child who has been raped, or a child who is pregnant due to incest. You do not allow hospitals to advise that a D&C is available nor do you subscribe to the morning after pill. Again, you all are arrogant people who want to control women.

I say the Federal Government has the duty to cut the funding to all of these States that are trying to skirt the laws.

I do not like abortions either for abortions sake, but you and others like you
are trying to play God and treading where Angels fear to tread.
Kappa51
TOWANDA....Righter of Wrongs
11:57 AM on 06/17/2011
Okay, if we are going to make cuts that hurt. Let's cut out paying for foster care...Oh, I'm sorry Michelle Bachman...too harsh? I know that your noble job of taking in 23 foster children was done from the goodness of your heart and I am sure you took no money from the government to accomplish this feat. But I wonder, did those government checks help pay for your 5 children to go to college...did the 23 foster children go to college? Would our country not be better off if women were given affordable contraceptives so they could have children only when they are ready and financially stable enough to do so? Wouldn't you think that a woman that has dealt with these poor children directly would see that? I guess that is just asking too much.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ritgar
no micro-bio is big enough for me
12:40 AM on 06/19/2011
Between all her farm subsidies and money (and tax breaks!) for the foster children she has made quite a bundle off the government. Hope she is ready to pay it all back - since it sure sounds like socialism to me.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LouGots
11:46 AM on 06/17/2011
Gu for it, baby-killers. Make sure every pro=life voter in ther country knows what this administration stnads for.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
1southernbelle
agape to eros, love informs us
12:27 PM on 06/17/2011
You mean the GOP conservative right? They are the real baby killers (and adult killers) as they have no problem denying prenatal care to the poor, or well baby care to the poor, or any medical care to the poor.

Did your read recently that life expectancy is shorter now in the South? Lack of decent lifelong medical care contributes mightily to that.
photo
Jeff1958
What a long strange trip it's been
12:35 PM on 06/17/2011
Abortion is legal. Deal with it.
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
trussia1
kids out of the pool, it's the adult swim
11:26 AM on 06/17/2011
Yep you're right. I live in IN and with all the great express to signing, a problem popped up.Two thirds of Medicaid recipients here are in nursing homes. That means when the funds dry up, your relatives are coming home for you to care for. Justice served. I'd like to see the faces these legislators when grampa ends up on their doorstep with a note that states-Due to loss of Medicaid funding you are now the caretaker and I perdict their vote against PP will be regretted.

The governor was approached by at least 2 people who stated that this move is illegal and the rest of the Medicaid funding would be pulled. It did and now we taxpayers are going to spend millions on defending this law since they already had laws that prevented funds for abortion. So, we'd better not hear the "we're broke" line for some time.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ritgar
no micro-bio is big enough for me
12:45 AM on 06/19/2011
You are right & I really hope people VOTE in the next election. The repubs could really give a cr@p0l@ about this issue - they are just using it to try tomake things as horrible as possible for people in the hope it all gets blamed on the current administration & they get in. Then everyone can kiss their @$$es goodbye.
11:16 AM on 06/17/2011
Planned parenthood actually saves government money. The math is at most on an eighth grade level. In addition, planned parenthood by offering contraception actually reduces the number of abortions by several 100,000 annually. In reduces healthcare costs by providing preventative care for millions of women. Every dollar spent on Planned Parenthood actually saves the government 3 dollars not to mention reduces healthcare costs and other economic ripples from better medical care.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mad catter
paperclip saleslady
11:04 AM on 06/17/2011
All of the bozos in Congress, ANY Congress, should lose their healthcare (FREE) immediately.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Lesperado
glad I wasn't born conservative
11:23 AM on 06/17/2011
Actually their "free" healthcare is not free.... WE pay for it!
Hiker54
If we couldn't laugh we would all go insane
12:03 PM on 06/17/2011
And we pay for wars, roads, oil subsudies, police forces, fire departments, public education, gps systems and a crapload of other things.

Some I agree with and some I don't. Some you agree with and some you don't. Get over it. It's the way gov't works. Just be thrilled if you never need to use the "free" healthcare that will be there if you do.

I know people who had worked their whole lives and had paid for insurance for decades and are now dead because,with cancer, they reached their insurance caps, drained their retirement funds and decided death would be better than putting their family into a lifetime of debt to stay alive.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LynxAlexiaBlack
To all the world I am but one to me that is enough
01:46 PM on 06/17/2011
as true as your statement is... it's free to them and they are all they care about
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
bobncar
for the good of all, not just the chosen few
10:52 AM on 06/17/2011
Ban all pregnancy terminations, ban birth control devices......translation.......sex is bad......sex is dirty.....sex is only for making children. You don't want children, don't have sex......If you have sex, then too bad.....the kid is yours to bear, and raise.

Oh I forgot.......that is unless you are a wealthy male politician and then it's a free for all.
10:39 AM on 06/17/2011
Think about this for a minute. All Indiana risks here is Medicaid funding. The Republicans HATE Medicaid & want it to go away. Surefire way to tank it by pulling this stunt.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Michael Shanley
10:52 AM on 06/17/2011
You think the receipents of said funds won't be a little upset and let it be known? This doen't bother this Progressive Dem at all....Republican are kicking their own reliable base by messing with the old and elderly.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
ChiGuy
Just an earthbound misfit, I
11:08 AM on 06/17/2011
Losing Medicaid funding would directly affect 4.5 million citizens in the state. The Governor and the Legislature would have an awful lot of explaining to do if that happened.

If it comes down to that, it will be a matter of who blinks first. Indiana leaders who would not want to face a disaster they created, or the Federal government which would avoid throwing the state's aid recipients on the fire.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Millie Lencioni
10:33 AM on 06/17/2011
This is what happens when individual states think that they can bypass federal laws. Mitch Daniels suffers from "little man syndrome" and does everything he can to exert his power. It's too bad the state has to spend needed funds to litigate these issues.
10:27 AM on 06/17/2011
so much for the social issues truce Mitch, the GOP have an unhealthy obssesion with curbing womens rights, it's scary.
photo
3RawBob
My Bible: the Jefferson Bible
10:26 AM on 06/17/2011
The anti-abortion movement wants to reduce the number of abortions. In their mind, the number one law that prevented abortions is the Hyde Amendment, which made abortions economically unfeasible for poor women on Medicaid in many states. There are many other proposed ways that the availability of abortions is being severely curtailed, but the entire thrust is based on the belief that if no woman can get an abortion, then the goal of abortion elimination is attained.
photo
fredsmom
feisty grandma
10:53 AM on 06/17/2011
The way to end or at least drastically cut abortions is to take care of the living. The Repubs don't give a hoot about poor living children, or poor women for that matter. What do they think is going to happen if all abortions are outlawed and all services and aid to the poor eliminated.
The Repubs are the Death Pannel.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
1southernbelle
agape to eros, love informs us
12:33 PM on 06/17/2011
Government can ban abortion all it wants. Abortion never disappears. It has been around for centuries and will continue. What happens is that women resort to hazardous methods and back alley hacks. Many more women will die. Of course that doesn't bother the "pro-life" movement [a misnomer if I ever heard one].