Conservatives and pro-life factions lobbied hard for abortion to be categorically excluded from the massive health care reform that President Obama has been working on for virtually his entire time in office. For those who condemn abortions, the idea of these procedures being even partially paid for with federal money is abhorrent and unacceptable. Obama caved to the demands of pro-lifers in order to get the massive measure passed in Congress, but now there is renewed furor on the topic. A band new congressional report has uncovered the fact that high-risk insurance pools run on the state level would be exempt from the abortion restrictions. Republican lawmakers have turned out in force to demand the rules be amended as quickly as possible.
Thirteen Republican Senators inundated Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius with letters demanding she act quickly and efficiently to prohibit state pools from covering elective abortions through high-risk pools. They demanded a response by the end of the day today, on the penalty of Congress “modify[ing]” the current law.” Any amendments to the healthcare plan will just delay the enactment date of these provisions, a setback that would be enormously dismaying to those who have waited so long for the hope of insurance when they have none.
Abortion remains a much-contended topic in modern day America. Pro life advocacy groups, aside from their strong theological and ethical objections to the termination of pregnancies, also argue that these procedures are elective and preventable, and not a worthwhile use of federal tax dollars. The exclusion of elective abortions from all aspects of the federal healthcare plan has enraged feminists and pro-choice groups, who point to the many social and economic benefits of making these procedures affordable and available to women of all social classes, including those who will be covered by federally-funded health insurance plans.
It’s not that the health care law allows high-risk state insurance pools to pay for elective abortions with federal money – it’s simply that the law does not prohibit this from happening. The so-called Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan was written with the original intent of aiding those turned down for insurance coverage as a result of restrictions against pre-existing conditions until the broader provisions of the healthcare reform law go into effect in 2014 and ban the denial of policies based on these reasons. The law allotted some five billion dollars in funds drawn from federal subsidies for the program, which is supposed to be either administered by the state or the Health and Human Services Department.
As states begin to announce how they will use their respective shares of the subsidies for developing high-risk pools, anti-abortion coalitions have had their radar turned to high, just waiting to see what decisions states would make with regards to abortion coverage. Pennsylvania got quickly dinged as one location where taxpayer-funded abortion was looking like an increasingly realistic possibility. The state’s policy did not actually reference abortion, interestingly enough, and does say that “elective abortions” will not be covered, but abortion foes warned that the lack of specific prohibitions left far too much room for dispute. The National Right to Life Committee said that, due to the fact that “elective abortion” is not a legal term, any abortion procedure legal in the state could be theoretically covered under the plan – and the bill footed by taxpayers. The Pennsylvania Insurance Department, for its own part, insists that the state cannot and will not use any federal money it might receive to fund abortions of any kind.
The Health and Human Services Department has showed a similar stance on the topic, stating that abortions simply will not be covered in any instance except those of rape, incest, or situations where carrying a pregnancy could place the mother’s life in danger. This statement isn’t considered good enough for the senators, however, since they contend that simply comments “do not have the force of law and will not prohibit the use of funds for these services.” In other words, they are exceedingly paranoid about the possibility of abortions being covered by federal funds, and nothing short of a binding official mandate will dissuade them from their single-minded insistence.
The letter was signed by: Sens. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah; Mike Enzi, R-Wyo.; Tom Coburn, R-Okla.; Richard Burr, R-N.C.; Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska; John Barrasso, R-Wyo.; Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn.; Mike Johanns, R-Neb.; Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.; John Thune, R-S.D.; John Cornyn, R-Texas; Chuck Grassley, Iowa; and Jon Kyl, R-Ariz. It was sent on Wednesday, and the lawmakers gave the HHS until the end of the day today to respond.
Trackback this post & | & Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed