(AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
On September 9, President Obama stood before both Houses of Congress and stated, "under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions and federal conscience laws will remain in place.". The US Conference of Catholic Bishops graciously accepted President Obama at his word and expressed approval of this overture. However, without specific language comparable to the Hyde amendment that forbids federal funding of abortion in government subsidized health care plans, tax dollars will be used for abortion. Action to back up the President's reassuring words is lacking.
Following the President's conciliatory comments, Dr. Charmaine Yoest, President and CEO of Americans United for Life Action, met with senior White House officials Melody Barnes, Tina Tchen, and Joshua DuBois. These officials refused to support official language to keep federal dollars from funding abortion. If the President was accurate in his address, why is there an objection to having language that codifies this? Dr. Yoest presented the legal argument demonstrating that without an explicit ban on abortion funding, tax dollars would pay for abortion.
The current Baucus bill requires that all premiums collected from government subsidized insurance plans include a surcharge that is earmarked for funding of abortion. This is an attempt to circumvent the allegation that tax dollars are being used to fund abortion. Instead of calling them tax dollars they are federally-mandated-surcharges-on-premiums dollars.
All attempts to exclude abortion from health care reform were thwarted in the House. The current Baucus Bill has significant problems for those who believe in the sanctity of all human life from conception to natural death. This bill mandates that at least one private plan in each premium rating area must provide coverage for abortion. The Federal Government will spend $6 billion establishing co-ops that will cover abortion. Today, three amendments are being put forth by Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) to amend the Baucus bill:
• Hatch Amdt. #C14 (355): Prohibits authorized or appropriated federal funds under this bill from being used for elective abortions and plans that cover such abortions.
• Hatch Amdt. #C13 (354): Protection for the right of conscience.
• Hatch Amdt. #C12 (353): Prohibits federal funds under this bill from being used to pay for assisted suicide and offers conscience protections to providers or plans refusing to offer assisted suicide services.
The outcome of these votes will indicate whether or not President Obama's claim to seek common ground on life issues was credible.
For more info:
Americans United for Life update on Baucus Bill
Americans United for Life explanation of legal mandate for abortion
Americans United for Life meets with White House
Analysis of Senator Baucus's Finance Bill
Comments
Today is meaningless. What is important is what happens in conference. Also, how you define abortion funding is important. While direct federal expenditures don't fund abortions, state funding definitely benefits from the existence of federal medicaid funds because it allows enough slack for states to act. Additioanlly, indirect spending through tax expenditures funds most, if not all, abortions funded by private insurance. Of course, quite a few abortions are paid for in cash, since the procedure is not expensive.
The key to stopping abortion is not to deny funding, but to make the poor better off, and not just in pregnancy.
Hey Michael, abortion = dead baby. We don't want to support anything directly or indirectly leading to a baby's murder. Learn your faith.
Do Joe Wilson was right after all?
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!