|
Abortion coverage battleGOP wants it out of health care overhaul; Dems say status quo would remainGene Davis, DDN Staff WriterThursday, October 22, 2009 | |
Colorado Republicans and Focus on the Family yesterday called on Democrat lawmakers to explicitly prohibit the use of public funds for abortions in their proposed health care reform legislation.
The charge is in stark contrast to the Colorado pro-life Democrats who say proposed health care reform legislation would only maintain the status quo on abortion funding.
Reps. Mike Coffman and Doug Lamborn, R-Colo., were among the 11 lawmakers to speak at the U.S. Capitol yesterday as part of an event that was hosted by Focus on the Family. At the press conference, Focus on the Family Action delivered approximately 137,000 voter-signed petitions asking lawmakers to add language that specifically excludes abortion coverage and funding to all proposed health care reform bills.
“Abortion is not health care and yet, without specific exclusion, these reform bills will be the platform for advancing a pro-abortion agenda,” said a statement from Coffman. “I applaud the work of Focus on the Family and my colleagues fighting to ensure health reform legislation is not used as a vehicle to advance a radical social agenda.”
Pro-choice Democrats say a firm compromise on abortion and health care reform has already been reached through an amendment attached by Reps. Lois Capps and Henry Waxman, D-Calif., to the House Energy and Commerce health care reform bill. The amendment has become integrated into almost all health care reform proposals.
The Capps-Waxman amendment would allow a woman to have an abortion, but the procedure would be paid for with separate dollars that come from privately paid premiums. Additionally, the amendment would require each insurer to offer one plan with abortion coverage and one without abortion coverage.
Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., is among the lawmakers who believe the amendment would successfully maintain the status quo on abortion funding.
“Since the beginning of the health care reform debate, we have committed ourselves to the premise that nothing in the bill should change existing abortion laws in this country,” she said in a statement.
However, pro-life advocates say that by funding private insurance plans that cover abortion, the proposed health care reform would, in effect, be financing abortions. The “private fund” generated by insurance premiums go into the U.S. Treasury and in turn become federal funds, pro-life groups say.
Federal money hasn’t helped fund abortions since 1976. The Hyde Amendment that passed that year restricted Medicaid from using federal money to pay for the procedure except in extreme cases like rape and incest.
If no specific language on abortion is put into a health care reform bill that passes, the decision on whether to use federal money to fund abortions would be left up to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. Demi Bardsley of the pro-life group Concerned Women for America said yesterday that granting “czar-like power” to a woman who most often sides with pro-choice groups is bad idea.
“President Obama’s appointees who have little regard for the value of life are far less qualified than mothers to make health decisions for our families,” she said a statement.
According to Reuters, Democratic leaders in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives are currently negotiating ways to merge five health care bills into a single measure in each chamber that will rein in costs, regulate insurers and expand coverage.
Eventually, the House and Senate must reconcile their separate bills on health care reform into a proposal that can be signed by President Barack Obama. His goal is to sign a bill by the end of the year.
|
