Print
E-mail
Abortion Funding May Accompany Healthcare Bill
By BRADLEY VASOLI, The Bulletin
While Congress’ mammoth health-care reform proposal does not contain the word “abortion,” many policymakers and advocates have noted that the legislation could mandate coverage of the practice.
The House of Representatives resolution creates new mandates and subsidies for American health care and crafts a “public option” for health insurance. To determine what benefits a national health policy would cover, the legislation sets up a Health Benefits Advisory Committee.
The National Right to Life Committee has pointed to several bureaucratic and judicial decisions that would potentially put such a committee on a path to mandating that abortion be covered as an “essential benefit.”
Mike McMonagle, public affairs director for the Pro-Life Union of Southeastern Pennsylvania, said Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius will undoubtedly steer the advisory committee toward requiring and publicly funding abortion coverage. Mrs. Sebelius was a consistent backer of abortion as governor of Kansas.
In addition, he said, medical facilities whose principals don’t wish to offer abortion procedures could face sanctions. If so, he said, the health-care legislation would have the effect of ratifying the major features of the controversial Freedom of Choice Act, a bill President Barack Obama has enthusiastically asked Congress to pass.
“This is disastrous for the pro-life cause,” Mr. McMonagle said. “This bill is the de facto enactment of the Freedom of Choice Act.”
Pro-life advocates say the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee has compounded the likelihood that the health-care bill will mandate plans to cover abortions. On July 9, the committee approved an amendment to the Senate version of the legislation authored by Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md. Though it does not explicitly refer to abortion, opponents say it stealthily codifies the prospect of mandatory abortion coverage.
“A group health plan and a health insurance issuer offering group or individual health insurance coverage,” the amendment reads, “shall provide coverage for, and shall not impose any cost-sharing requirements (other than minimal cost sharing in accordance with guidelines developed by the Secretary) for, with respect to women (including pregnant women and individuals of child bearing age), such additional preventive care and screenings not covered under section 2708 as provided for in guidelines supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration.”
Pro-life members of the Senate committee who are concerned about a reformed health-care system subsidizing abortions offered four amendments to the bill after Ms. Mikulski’s passed. One would have prevented new federal funding of abortion, another would have prevented a mandate for abortion coverage, a third would have allowed medical providers to opt out of providing abortions and the last would have allowed state restrictions on abortion to stand. All of them failed.
Every Democrat on the committee voted against the pro-life amendments except for Bob Casey, D-Pa., who also voted against the Mikulski amendment. But when the full health-care bill came up for a vote on July 15, Mr. Casey voted with other Democrats in favor of the legislation, which doesn’t include the pro-life language he supported.
Mr. Casey has long billed himself as a standout among Democrats as a defender of unborn life. His late father, who was governor of Pennsylvania until 1995, was outspokenly pro-life.
“He’s a hypocrite on this,” Mr. McMonagle said of the younger Casey. “He can’t have it both ways.”
Bradley Vasoli can be reached at bvasoli@thebulletin.us
The House of Representatives resolution creates new mandates and subsidies for American health care and crafts a “public option” for health insurance. To determine what benefits a national health policy would cover, the legislation sets up a Health Benefits Advisory Committee.
The National Right to Life Committee has pointed to several bureaucratic and judicial decisions that would potentially put such a committee on a path to mandating that abortion be covered as an “essential benefit.”
Mike McMonagle, public affairs director for the Pro-Life Union of Southeastern Pennsylvania, said Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius will undoubtedly steer the advisory committee toward requiring and publicly funding abortion coverage. Mrs. Sebelius was a consistent backer of abortion as governor of Kansas.
In addition, he said, medical facilities whose principals don’t wish to offer abortion procedures could face sanctions. If so, he said, the health-care legislation would have the effect of ratifying the major features of the controversial Freedom of Choice Act, a bill President Barack Obama has enthusiastically asked Congress to pass.
“This is disastrous for the pro-life cause,” Mr. McMonagle said. “This bill is the de facto enactment of the Freedom of Choice Act.”
Pro-life advocates say the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee has compounded the likelihood that the health-care bill will mandate plans to cover abortions. On July 9, the committee approved an amendment to the Senate version of the legislation authored by Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md. Though it does not explicitly refer to abortion, opponents say it stealthily codifies the prospect of mandatory abortion coverage.
“A group health plan and a health insurance issuer offering group or individual health insurance coverage,” the amendment reads, “shall provide coverage for, and shall not impose any cost-sharing requirements (other than minimal cost sharing in accordance with guidelines developed by the Secretary) for, with respect to women (including pregnant women and individuals of child bearing age), such additional preventive care and screenings not covered under section 2708 as provided for in guidelines supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration.”
Pro-life members of the Senate committee who are concerned about a reformed health-care system subsidizing abortions offered four amendments to the bill after Ms. Mikulski’s passed. One would have prevented new federal funding of abortion, another would have prevented a mandate for abortion coverage, a third would have allowed medical providers to opt out of providing abortions and the last would have allowed state restrictions on abortion to stand. All of them failed.
Every Democrat on the committee voted against the pro-life amendments except for Bob Casey, D-Pa., who also voted against the Mikulski amendment. But when the full health-care bill came up for a vote on July 15, Mr. Casey voted with other Democrats in favor of the legislation, which doesn’t include the pro-life language he supported.
Mr. Casey has long billed himself as a standout among Democrats as a defender of unborn life. His late father, who was governor of Pennsylvania until 1995, was outspokenly pro-life.
“He’s a hypocrite on this,” Mr. McMonagle said of the younger Casey. “He can’t have it both ways.”
Bradley Vasoli can be reached at bvasoli@thebulletin.us
 |
||
| New York Catholic Nurse Forced To Assist In Abortion |
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of thebulletin.us.
You must register with a valid email to post comments. Only your Member ID will be posted with the comments.
Registered users sign in here: |
Become a Registered User |
